Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Airports Authority of India – Appellant
Versus
URC Construction (P) Ltd. – Respondent
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 Respondent.
2. The Petitioner has also sought setting aside of the Order dated 07.05.2019 on the Application under Section 33 (1) and (1)(B) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, whereby certain corrections have been carried out in the Award, by the learned Arbitrator.
3. Facts in brief, are that the Petitioner/Airports Authority of India (AAI) floated a tender for the construction of New Control Tower-cum- Technical work, at Mangalore. As per the NIT, the last date for submission of the bid was 12.12.2011 and the final date scheduled for opening of the financial bid was 20.12.2011. The Respondent made a bid, which was accepted vide Letter dated 12.04.2012 for the work at the cost of Rs.18
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 ....
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 ....
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
