Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ., D.N.RAY
National Highways Authority Of India Thro Harmendra Singh Rotrwal – Appellant
Versus
Mer Devabhai Ramdebhai – Respondent
ORDER :
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. As per the Office Report, notice sent to respondent No.1 has been served as on 23.07.2024, through RPAD, which is evident from the Track Consignment Report placed on record.
2. No-one has put in appearance on behalf of the contesting respondent No.1. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the formal parties.
3. This appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, “the Act’ 1996”) is 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) of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , 1956 (for short “the Act, 1956”) 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 Act, 1956 for redetermination of the compensation payable for acquisition of lands under the provisions of the Act, 1956 where landholders have invoked the arbitration under Section 3G(5
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 Section 34, a Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to reappraise evidence in arbitral awards and may only modify awards for clear errors, not on merits.
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 can partially set aside an arbitral Award and has limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court cannot modify an Award but can set ....
The court clarified that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the scope of review is limited to setting aside awards for patent illegality or public policy violations, not for modification.
Point of Law : Once the time-limit or extended time-limit for challenging the arbitral award expires, the period for enforcing the award under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act commences.
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
