Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ, MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI, J
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THRO HARMENDRA SINGH ROTRWAL – Appellant
Versus
MER RANABHAI RAMDEBHAI – Respondent
ORDER :
SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.
Mr. Jenil Shah, the learned advocate appearing for the respondents/land holders would submit that the questions as to whether the powers of the Court under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 will include the power to modify an arbitral award and further if the power to modify is available, whether such power can be exercised only when the award is severable and part thereof can be modified, are engaging attention of the Apex Court Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 15336-15337 of 2021. It is submitted that two other questions as to whether the power to set aside the award under Section 34 of the Act, 1996, being a larger power, will include the power to modify the arbitral award and if so, to what extent and whether the power to modify the award can be read into the power to set aside the award under Section 34 of the Act, 1996, are also subject matter of considerations before the Apex Court.
2. The contention is that in view of the fact that the above noted questions have been referred to the Larger Bench vide judgment and order dated 20th February, 2024 passed by the three Judges’ Bench of the Apex Court, this Cou
The court cannot modify an arbitral award under Section 34 by re-appreciating evidence; it must follow existing law and proceed with the hearing despite pending references.
Judicial review of an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds without reappraising evidence; the Court cannot modify awards based on merits.
The court affirmed that under Section 34, a Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to reappraise evidence in arbitral awards and may only modify awards for clear errors, not on merits.
Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a court cannot modify an arbitral award through reappraisal of evidence or merits; it is restricted to grounds explicitly stated in the....
The court affirmed that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, courts cannot re-evaluate the merits of an arbitral award and must adhere to jurisdictional limits under Section 34.
The court cannot modify an arbitral award under Section 34 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act; it can only set aside or uphold the award based on specified grounds.
The court emphasized that judicial interference with arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is severely limited and cannot involve reevaluation of merits or factual findings.
A Section 34 court cannot modify an arbitral award, as established by the Supreme Court in Hakeem, which overruled previous case law allowing such modifications.
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
