Back
NAVIN CHAWLA
Great Eastern Energy Corporation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sopan Projects – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)
1. These cross petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') have been filed by both the parties to the arbitration proceedings, challenging the Arbitral Award dated 10.11.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the `Impugned Amended Arbitral Award') passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.
2. The disputes between the parties arose out of the Work Order for construction/expansion of existing Gas Gathering Station-North placed by Great Eastern Energy Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the `petitioner') on Sopan Projects (hereinafter referred to as the `respondent'). The said disputes were settled by an Arbitral Award dated 25.08.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the `Original Award') passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator. The respondent thereafter filed an application under Section 33 of the Act. On the said application, the learned Sole Arbitrator passed an order dated 25.10.2017, allowing the application of the respondent and making certain corrections in the Award. The petitioner, aggrieved of the said order, filed an application seeking recall of the said order, on which, with
The learned Arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction in reviewing the Original Award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court confirmed the validity of the Arbitrator's findings regarding excess work claims and the correct application of interest, highlighting that overlapping interest claims were erroneous.
An arbitral award must be supported by reasoning and evidence; a Minority Award is merely an opinion and cannot prevail over a Majority Award; the Court cannot modify an arbitral award.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'live dispute' and 'admitted liability' in the context of arbitration proceedings, and the court's reliance on relevant provi....
The Court held that the learned Arbitrator had erred in decreeing the award with respect to the rate of interest, and hence, the Award qua issue no. 20 with regards to the rate of interest is liable ....
The scope of interference with an Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is fairly limited and narrow. The Courts shall not sit in an appeal while adjudicating ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
