Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice P.B. BALAJI
A.Tulsi Ram – Appellant
Versus
Chaitanya Builders and Leasing Private – Respondent
ORDER :
P.B.Balaji, J.
The Original Petition has been filed under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short 'Act'), to set aside the award of the learned Sole Arbitrator, a retired Judge of this Court, dated 01.06.2016 and the erratum to the award dated 10.08.2016.
2. I have heard Mr.J.R.K.Bhavanandham, learned counsel for the petitioner in O.P.No.838 of 2016 and the first respondent in Civil Revision Petitions, Mr.Roshan Balasubramanian, learned counsel for the first respondent in O.P.No.838 of 2016 and the petitioner in all the Civil Revision Petitions and Mr.S.Kaushik Ramaswamy, learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 5, who are the legal heirs of the second respondent, who is none else than the brother of the petitioner in O.P.No.838 of 2016.
3. The brief facts, which are necessary to adjudicate the Original Petition under Section 34 of the Act as well as the Civil Revision Petitions, are as follows:
The petitioner is the brother of the second respondent and they along with their mother were co-owners of the land comprised in Survey Nos.59/2A, 59/3A, 59/4 and 81/5A situated at East Coast Road, Muttukadu, lands measuring to an extent of 4.92 Acres.
4. The first
The court upheld the arbitral award, finding no unreasonable delay or jurisdictional errors, affirming the arbitrator's findings were based on evidence, as claims were not barred by limitation.
The court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the appeal against the arbitration award, confirming that there was no patent illegality or grounds for interference under the Arbitration and Concilia....
The Arbitrator has jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes arising from consolidated claims if the parties treated them as a single transaction, and the award is not subject to interference under Section....
The court upheld the arbitral award directing possession and damages, affirming the applicability of limitation provisions to arbitration proceedings.
Unconditional stay of monetary arbitral awards under Section 36 requires exceptional case of prima facie perversity or illegality; otherwise, deposit of full award amount appropriate, guided by Code ....
The court upheld the Arbitrator's award on property transactions, emphasizing the necessity of permissions under applicable land laws while affirming that a plausible ruling can stand even with insuf....
The main legal point established is that the Court does not act as a Court of appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and should not interfere with the arbitrator's fin....
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of judicial intervention under Section 34 of the A and C Act and the finality of arbitral awards.
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
