Back
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K (PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT) – Appellant
Versus
M/S HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTIONS CO. LIMITED AND ORS. – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
1. These two arbitration appeals are directed against judgement/order dated 18th December 2019 passed by Additional District Judge, Srinagar (“court below” for short) and for setting-aside the same on the grounds made mention of therein.
2. I have heard learned counsel for parties and considered the matter.
3. As record would tend to show that an Award dated 28th December 2014 was passed by Arbitral Tribunal comprising of three arbitrators, namely, Shri R.P. Indoria; Shri J.S. Katoch; and Shri N.N.Singhal. By virtue of the said Award, appellant-Government of J&K was directed to pay Rs.78,92,73,307/- to claimants/respondents along with interest @ 12% per annum from 9th May 2012 upto the date of Award.
4. Against aforesaid Award, an application under Section 34 of J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 (for short “the Act”) was filed by Government of J&K through Chief Engineer, Mughal Road Project, J&K (appellant in AA no.07/2020) before the court below, which in terms of impugned judgement/order has modified the Arbitral Tribunal’s award.
5. While taking into consideration submissions of learned senior counsel for parties, an issue has come up as to whether the court below
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.
(1) Appeal against modified arbitral award – Merits of award are only to be gone into, if award is demonstrated to be contrary to public policy of India.(2) Arbitral proceedings are per se not compar....
The judgment emphasizes the limited grounds for interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, highlighting the need for restraint by courts while examini....
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.
Courts must limit interference with arbitral awards to evident legal flaws or lack of evidence, reinforcing the principle that arbitration decisions are final and binding.
The court affirmed that under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it cannot reassess the merits of an arbitral award unless it violates public policy or is patently illegal.
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.
(1) While exercising power under Section 34 of A & C Act, arbitral award can only be confirmed or set aside, but not modified.(2) Award passed by Arbitral Tribunal cannot be set aside on the ground t....
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
