Back
SUNITA AGARWAL, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Reliance Media Works Limited – Appellant
Versus
Nishant Construction Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pranav Trivedi, J.
1. The instant First Appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), challenging the judgment and order dated 30.01.2021 passed by the Judge, Commercial Court, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred as to “the Commercial Court) in Commercial Civil Misc. Application No.26 of 2018, wherein the Commercial Court rejected the application preferred by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the appeal is that the appellant and the respondent entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for development of Multiplex Theaters on land situated at Survey No. 46 admeasuring 7010 square meters of Vejalpur TPS No. 4 situated at Regency Center, Near Prahlad Nagar, Satellite Road, Ahmedabad on 01.02.2008. As per the clauses of the MoU and subsequently the contract, there were reciprocal promises for performance. It was the case of respondent that as per the clauses contained in the contract, particularly clauses iv, v(a) etc., the responsibility for performance of certain obligations was on the appellant and its Architects. This was mainly
The court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to cases of patent illegality or perverse findings, respecting the finality of arbitration.
The judgment reinforces the principle that courts have limited grounds to interfere with arbitral awards, respecting the finality of arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
The court upheld the principle that arbitral awards should not be interfered with unless there is a clear violation of public policy or a patent illegality.
The court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to specific grounds, emphasizing respect for the arbitral process and the finality of awards.
The court affirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited, focusing on the necessity of cogent reasoning and adherence to public policy.
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 emphasized the wide scope of reference of the arbitrator and the appellant's failure to file a defense, highlighting the limited scope of interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration an....
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
