Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
Gorkha Security Services – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Health Services – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 34 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , [Act], seeking to set aside the Arbitral Award dated 18.08.2017 , [Impugned Award], to the extent of the Petitioner's claims which were rejected or not considered, passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal in the matter titled “M/s Gorkha Security Services v. Directorate of Health Services”.
2. At the outset, it is noted that during the course of oral arguments, the Petitioner expressly confined its submissions solely to the findings rendered by the learned Arbitrator in respect of Claim No.4 in the Impugned Award.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. The Directorate of Health Services, Respondent, under the aegis of the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi, issued a Notice Inviting Tender[ NIT] seeking bids to provide security manpower to be deployed across various dispensaries operated by the Respondent in Delhi.
4. M/s Gorkha Security Services, [Petitioner] is a partnership firm engaged in the business of providing security and manpower services. The Petitioner participated in the said bidding process and stood successful, pursuant to which vide a Letter of Award d
An arbitrator's award must provide intelligible reasoning; failure to do so violates public policy, allowing for it to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
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....
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....
An arbitral award can only be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if the appellant establishes that the award is in conflict with the public policy of India, is p....
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....
(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 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....
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
