Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DHARMESH SHARMA
Brij Lal & Sons – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 03.02.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge, [ADJ] in Arbitration Suit No. 60 of 2006, whereby the objections to the award dated 11.05.2005, filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”] was dismissed by the learned Arbitrator.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the appellant was awarded a contract for work as C/o NACEN at Sector-29, Faridabad, vide Agreement No. 12/EE/FCD-II/99-2000 by the respondent no. 1. The contract, valued at Rs.1,53,054/-, was to be completed on 31.10.1999. However, the work was completed on 03.04.2000, following the grant of an extension of time, [EOT] from 01.11.1999 to 03.04.2000. Upon completion, the appellant raised claims for the work done, which were disputed by the respondent no. 1. As per the agreement, the dispute was to be referred to arbitration. The appellant approached the Chief Engineer of the respondent no. 1 for the appointment of an arbitrator, but no appointment was made. Consequently, the appellant filed a suit under Sections 8 and 11 of the Act, before the Learned ADJ, Sh. D.K. Mahotra
The court affirmed that under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it cannot reassess the merits of an arbitral award unless it violates public policy or is patently illegal.
(1) Appeal against modified arbitral award – Merits of award are only to be gone into, if award is demonstrated to be contrary to public policy of India.(2) Arbitral proceedings are per se not compar....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court should not interfere with an arbitral award unless the arbitrator's conclusions are arbitrary, capricious, or perverse. The court's ....
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.
The judgment emphasizes the limited grounds for interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, highlighting the need for restraint by courts while examini....
Limited grounds for interference with an Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act
The limited scope of intervention by Courts in arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing the need to satisfy specific grounds for setting aside an arbitral....
The court can interfere with an Arbitral Award if it is contrary to public policy, patently illegal, unfair, or unreasonable. The award must not be in conflict with the fundamental policy of Indian l....
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of interference with arbitral awards and the principle that courts should not interfere with arbitral awards unless there is a patent illegality or violation....
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
