Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
TDI International India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the arbitration, claim process, and agreements. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. petitioner's argument on approval withdrawal. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. petitioner’s contention on commercial viability of advertising panels. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. respondent's defense against claim reappraisal. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. court’s analysis of jurisdiction and principles of judicial intervention. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 6. court's findings on claim 1's merits. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 7. court's reasoning regarding claim 3's rejection. (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 8. conclusion on the petition and affirmation of the arbitral award. (Para 52 , 53 , 54) |
JUDGMENT :
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, A&C Act, challenging theAward dated 19.02.2010 , Impugned Award passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator in the matter titled “M/s TDI International India Ltd. v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.”
2. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the challenge in the present Petition is confined only to Claim
Judicial intervention under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited; an award may only be set aside for contravention of public policy or patent illegality, rather than disagreements over contra....
Judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited to assessing non-compliance with public policy or blatant errors; arbitral awards will not be disturbed unless they....
The court reaffirmed the limited scope of judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing that courts cannot reappraise evidence or in....
The court affirmed that limited judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act does not allow for re-evaluation of arbitration awards unless they are demonstrably perverse, illegal, or devoi....
The limited grounds for interference with an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, emphasize the concept of patent illegality and the criteria for setting asi....
The court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to cases of patent illegality or perverse findings, respecting the finality of arbitration.
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
