Back
VIBHU BAKHRU, SACHIN DATTA
Mohd Amin Deceased Through Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Mohd Iqbal Deceased Through Lrs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
1. The appellants have filed the intra court appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the A&C Act) impugning a judgment dated 05.04.2024 (hereafter the impugned judgment) passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in O.M.P.(COMM) 250/2021 captioned Mohd. Amin (Deceased) through LRs & Ors. v. Mohd. Iqbal (Deceased) through LRs & Ors.
2. The appellants had preferred the said application under Section 34 of the A&C Act impugning an arbitral award dated 18.05.2021 (hereafter the impugned award). The learned Single Judge found no grounds to interfere with the impugned award and consequently, rejected the application preferred by the appellants to set aside the impugned award.
3. The impugned award was rendered in the context of the disputes that had arisen in connection with the Compromise Agreement (hereafter the Agreement) dated 25.02.1991 entered into between Mohd. Amin (represented through the appellants being the legal representatives) and Mohd. Iqbal (represented through the respondents being the legal representatives). For the purposes of the present appeal, we would refer to deceased Mohd. Amin and his su
The court upheld the arbitral award directing possession and damages, affirming the applicability of limitation provisions to arbitration proceedings.
Unconditional stay of monetary arbitral awards under Section 36 requires exceptional case of prima facie perversity or illegality; otherwise, deposit of full award amount appropriate, guided by Code ....
Claims in arbitration must adhere to statutory limitation periods; failure to comply renders them non-maintainable, emphasizing the strict nature of limitation under arbitration law.
Arbitration proceedings validly commenced under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act on notice dated 20.08.1992; findings on completion and cost claims affirmed due to lack of evidence.
The court upheld the arbitral award, finding no unreasonable delay or jurisdictional errors, affirming the arbitrator's findings were based on evidence, as claims were not barred by limitation.
The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court dealing with an appeal under Section 37 against the judgment in a petition under Section 34 is more constrained than the jurisdiction of the Court dealing with....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal must be based on evidence and material on record, and the Court will not interfere with the award unless....
The court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the appeal against the arbitration award, confirming that there was no patent illegality or grounds for interference under the Arbitration and Concilia....
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
