Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Delhi Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Gupta And Co. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J. - The Appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 1996') read with Section 13(1)(A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 has been filed by the appellant-DDA for setting aside the Order dated 14.09.2022, passed in OMP(COMM) 5 of 2021, by of the learned District Judge (Commercial Court), whereby the Objections preferred by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 were dismissed on the ground of maintainability.
2. Facts in brief are that the respondent No.1-M/s. Gupta & Co. (Claimant before the learned Arbitrator) was awarded a Tender by the appellant-DDA (Respondent before the learned Arbitrator) vide Letter dated 10.03.1986, whereby the work awarded was to be completed by 20.03.1987. The work contract got completed on 29.08.1989. However, the completion of works was not recorded and the respondent No.1's Final Bill was not prepared. The respondent No. 1 continued to pursue with appellant-DDA for the finalization of its bills and eventually, after much effort, Final Bill was prepared. The intimation regarding the same was given to the respondent No. 1 vide Letter dated 17.01.20
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the courts to entertain objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199....
The jurisdiction of courts over arbitration applications must adhere to specified pecuniary thresholds established by law, and errors in this regard can invalidate decisions.
Venue of arbitration does not equate to its jurisdictional seat; petitions under the Arbitration Act must be filed where arbitration took place, as established in prior Supreme Court rulings.
The court affirmed that judicial intervention in arbitral awards is limited to grounds of public policy or patent illegality, emphasizing respect for the Arbitrator's findings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope for interference with arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the discretion of the Arbitrator in a....
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
