P.B.SURESH KUMAR, C.S.SUDHA
Navayuga Engineering Company Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by the Chief Engineer (NW) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.S. Sudha, J.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Project Director, National Highways Authority of India v. M. Hakeem, (2021 SCC Online 473) held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) does not contemplate modification of an award by a court in a proceeding under the said Section. Now the question is what constitutes modification of an award? If the Arbitrator has awarded separate amounts on various independent claims, would setting aside some of the claims, which are separable and independent of the remaining claims, constitute a modification of the award? This is one major issue apart from the justifiability of interference made by the court below and the arbitrability of certain disputes decided by the Arbitrator, that calls for an adjudication in this case.
2. First, a brief reference to the facts of the case-
The appellant and the respondent herein entered into a contract for the provision of Parade Ground, PT Complex, Athletic Track, Swimming Pool, Covered PT and Drill Shed etc. at Ezhimala. The work was completed on 31/10/2007. Disputes arose between the parties and hence the matter was referred for arbitration. Sri. N.D. Bhagatkar, Chief En
Madnani Construction Corporation Pvt. Ltd. vs. UoI
R.S. Jiwani Mumbai v. Ircon International Ltd. Mumbai
Anugraha Engineers & Contractors v. Union of India
P.R. Shah Shares and Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. v. B.H.H. Securities Pvt. Ltd.
McDermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Ltd
P.R. Shah, Shanu and Stock Brocker (P) Ltd. v. M/s. B.H.H. Securities (P) Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.