Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, D.N.RAY
National Highways Authority Of India Through Project Director Harmendra Singh Rotrwal – Appellant
Versus
Bharvad Bodabhai Rudabhai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's factual background of the appeals. (Para 1 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 2. arguments regarding the reappreciation of evidence. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 14) |
| 3. court's observations on the limits of judicial intervention under section 34. (Para 3 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. final conclusion and directive to the arbitrator to reassess. (Para 15 , 22) |
| 5. mandate for fresh re-evaluation of the evidence by the statutory arbitrator. (Para 20) |
ORDER :
SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.
1. These appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, “the Act’ 1996”) are directed against the orders dated 27.10.2023 passed by the Court on the applications under Section 34 of the Act’ 1996, whereby while setting aside the arbitral award dated 29.10.2018 passed by the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) enhanced amount of compensation for acquisition of the lands of the private respondents herein has been awarded. It was a statutory arbitration where the learned Arbitrator was appointed by the Central Government under Section 3G(5) of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT for redetermination of the compensation payable for acquisition of lands under the provisions of the NATIONAL HI
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 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.
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.
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.
![A. Ismail Sait VS Competent Authority Land Acquisition and Special District Revenue Officer National Highways [NH-45] Villupuram District - 2024 Supreme(Mad) 2156](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Madras_2.png)
The court affirmed the necessity of a judicial approach in determining compensation for land acquisition, allowing for modification of arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Concilia....
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
