Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Airports Authority of India – Appellant
Versus
URC Construction (P) Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of facts and timeline of the contract. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 11 , 16) |
| 2. claims and disputes initiated by the respondent. (Para 12 , 14 , 17 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 3. arbitrator's decisions and reasoning for awards. (Para 24 , 26 , 28) |
| 4. petitioner's arguments against the arbitrator's decisions. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 37) |
| 5. court's perspective on evidence and delay attribution. (Para 82 , 83 , 84 , 86 , 90) |
| 6. discussion on escalation charges and their justification. (Para 115 , 116 , 121 , 123) |
| 7. justification for overhead charges awarded by the arbitrator. (Para 130 , 132 , 135 , 138) |
| 8. final conclusion and upholding of the arbitral award. (Para 140 , 148 , 149) |
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. The present Petition under Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been filed by the Petitioner/Airports Authority of India, for setting aside the Award dated 26.03.2019 whereby a total sum of Rs. 2,57,86,532/- along with interest @ 10% w.e.f. 04.09.2017 till the date of the Award and further 10% from 27.03.2019 up to the date of actual payment along with Rs. 7,00,000/- as costs, has been awarded to the Res
The judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is restricted to issues of patent illegality, ensuring that arbitrator's findings are not disturbed unless they fundamenta....
An arbitrator may award escalated costs due to employer delay despite prohibitory clauses, reinforcing that delays affecting contractor performance can lead to compensatory claims.
The court upheld the arbitrator's award, affirming that delays were attributable to the petitioner, justifying the respondent's claims for additional expenses.
The court emphasized the requirement for the arbitrator to assign reasons in support of the award and the limited scope of interference by the court in arbitration awards.
Arbitration Agreement – Award -Scope of interference by the courts into the award is quite limited. A court considering an application under Section 30 of the Act neither sits in appeal over an award....
The scope of interference with an Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is fairly limited and narrow. The Courts shall not sit in an appeal while adjudicating ....
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
