Back
M. SUNDAR, K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
N. Jayamurugan – Appellant
Versus
Saravana Global Holdings Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
1. This is an Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (hereinafter ‘the Act’) against the order dated 21.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in O.P. No. 595 of 2019, whereby the application preferred by the respondent herein under Section 34 of the Act for setting aside the award dated 20.02.2019 of the Sole Arbitrator was allowed.
2. The claimant before the Arbitral Tribunal is the appellant and the respondent herein is the counter claimant before the Arbitral Tribunal.
3. The present dispute arises out of a Memorandum of Understanding dated 18.05.2006 entered between the appellant and respondent for purchasing immovable properties measuring about 200 acres at Moosivakkam Village, Kancheepuram. As per the terms of agreement the appellant paid a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as advance and thereafter, made payments on various dates to the respondent for the said purpose. Since the respondent failed to comply with the terms of agreement, the appellant initiated Arbitral proceeding for the following reliefs:
The court affirmed that a promise to pay a time-barred debt under Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act can revive the claim, and the Arbitrator's findings were not subject to re-evaluation under ....
Claims in arbitration must adhere to statutory limitation periods; failure to comply renders them non-maintainable, emphasizing the strict nature of limitation under arbitration law.
The acknowledgment of liability extends the limitation period for claims, while counterclaims not acknowledged are barred by limitation.
Arbitration awards under Section 34 are upheld unless they contradict fundamental policies of Indian law or evidence patent illegality; acknowledgments of liability in balance sheets extend the limit....
The court reaffirmed the limited scope of judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing that courts cannot reappraise evidence or in....
The court can set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 if it violates substantive law, contract terms, or public policy, especially when procedural requirements aren't met or if the award is pate....
The court affirmed that limited judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act does not allow for re-evaluation of arbitration awards unless they are demonstrably perverse, illegal, or devoi....
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
