Back
SUNITA AGARWAL, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sabar Cables Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pranav Trivedi, J.
1. The present First Appeal is filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as to "the Act") assailing the correctness and validity of judgment dated 12.01.2023 passed by the learned Judge, Court of 6th Additional District & Commercial Court, Mahesana (hereinafter referred to as the “learned Court”) in Civil Misc. Application No.218 of 2016.
2. The factual matrix leading to the filing of the First Appeal is that the appellant - Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. is a registered company engaged in the business of supplying electricity energy to specified areas in the state of Gujarat, whereas the respondent - original claimant is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacturing PVC, insulated power and control cables etc. The tender was invited on behalf of different distribution of power companies and after finalization of tender, order was placed / issued by respective distribution of power companies. With regard to tender of the appellant, the respondent had submitted the tender, which being of the lowest rate and also satisfying the requirements,
Penalty and price variation clauses in a contract can coexist and be applied independently without constituting double punishment for delays.
The court emphasized that an arbitral award must be reasoned and address core contractual issues, with judicial intervention restricted to cases of patent illegality under Section 34 of the Arbitrati....
The interpretation of contractual clauses by an Arbitrator cannot be interfered with unless it is unreasonable or against settled legal principles.
The court confirmed the validity of the Arbitrator's findings regarding excess work claims and the correct application of interest, highlighting that overlapping interest claims were erroneous.
The interpretation of the contract as given by the Arbitral Tribunal is to be accepted if plausible, and the court should be slow in interfering with concurrent findings unless there is apparent perv....
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 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
