Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NAJMI WAZIRI, SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
National Highways Authority of India – Appellant
Versus
PCL Sticco JV – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to arbitral award based on financial incapacity. (Para 1) |
| 2. claimant's financial incapacity and tribunal observations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. examination of contractual rights and eot implications. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. contractor's financial difficulties and affirmative obligations of nhai. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. dismissal of appeal due to lack of merit. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT
Najmi Wazri, J. (Oral)
The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
1. This appeal under s.37(1)(c) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (`the Act') impugns the order dated 23.03.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in O.M.P. (COMM) No.77/2016, dismissing the appellant's petition under s.34 of the Act which had impugned an arbitral award dated 15.12.2015, passed by a three-member Arbitral Tribunal. The respondent's claims were allowed, the appellant was directed to pay monies relating to an Agreement for "Widening to 4/6 lanes and strengthening of existing 2-Lane Carriageway of NH-5 in the State of Orissa from km 284.00 to km 338.00 (Ganjam-Sunkhala) Contract Package OR-VII".
2. The grounds for challenge in this appeal are that albeit the
An expulsion under a contract must have legitimate causes, and unjustified actions by one party render such expulsion illegal, reaffirming constraints under arbitration frameworks.
The arbitral Tribunal found NHaI's actions to expel the respondent from the site was unjustified and illegal based on various grounds, including the delay in granting Extension of Time (EOT) and the ....
Point of Law - Limited scope of the jurisdiction of this Court vested in it by Section 34 of the 1996 Act, no occasion arises for this Court to revisit the said findings of the learned Arbitral Tribu....
Point of Law : Limited scope of the jurisdiction of this Court vested in it by Section 34 of the 1996 Act, no occasion arises for this Court to revisit the said findings of the learned Arbitral Tribu....
An arbitrator's award may be upheld if it conforms to contract terms, despite challenges regarding procedural compliance or interpretation, provided it does not contravene public policy.
NHAI is contractually obliged to pay 90% of the Debt Due to lenders irrespective of defaults by the concessionaire, with no deductions permitted.
The court emphasized that arbitral awards should not be interfered with solely based on disagreements with findings, affirming the limited grounds for appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
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
