Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Tantia Construction Limited – Appellant
Versus
Ircon International Ltd. – Respondent
(Video-Conferencing)
1. This petition, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the 1996 Act"), is directed against a supplementary award dated 20th August, 2020, passed by the learned arbitrator. By the supplementary award, the amounts awarded in favour of the petitioner in the original award dated 23rd January, 2020, against Claims No. 6 and 12, were reduced. The amount of Rs.1,90,86,595/-, awarded in respect of claim no. 6, was reduced to Rs.97,85,184/- and the amount of Rs.58,08,475/-, awarded in respect of claim no. 12, was reduced to Rs.54,01,882/-. Side by side, the learned arbitrator also modified the reasons for awarding the aforesaid amounts. The changes effected by the impugned supplementary award stand captured, in the impugned award itself, in a tabular form, thus:
| "Claim no. 6 Claim for illegal encashment of performance bank guarantee | Amount claimed (Rs.) | Amount awarded in Original award (Rs.) | Award modified (Rs.) |
| 1,90,86,595 | 1,90,86,595 | 97,85,184 |
| Original reasons of award | Modified reasons of award |
| As deliberated in above paras, the termination of the contract was wrongful, illegal and arbitrary due to the occurrence of earthquake in |
The court held that the failure to adhere to the audi alteram partem principle and rectify errors under Section 33 without the appellant's hearing invalidated the supplementary arbitration award.
Violation of Section 33(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the principles of natural justice led to the setting aside of the impugned supplementary award.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the applicants were entitled to the benefit of the amendment made to Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997, and that the de....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once an arbitral award becomes enforceable after the prescribed time limit, no further application under Section 33 of the Act can be entertai....
Arbitral Award – Limitation – S. 34(3) specifically states that an application for setting aside may not be made after three months have lapsed from date of which party making an application had rece....
Scanned signed copy of the award/order of the Arbitral Tribunal to the parties would be a valid delivery as envisaged under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
