Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH
Annai Builders Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
G.B. Sarath Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the contractual agreement and disputes (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. claims and counterclaims raised by parties (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. issues framed by the arbitrator (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. petitioner's arguments against the award (Para 14 , 16) |
| 5. requirement for reasoning in arbitrator's findings (Para 23 , 24) |
| 6. assessment of work completion and payments (Para 25 , 26) |
| 7. rejection of counterclaims (Para 27 , 28) |
| 8. court's final decision on the award (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
ORDER :
2. The brief facts of the case are the respondent/claimant entered into a building contract agreement with the petitioner on 02.02.2011 for the construction of Plots, Smart Homes at Anagaputhur containing 92 Plots. As per the contract, the Contractor should construct in accordance with the detailed drawings given by the owner which was appended as Annexure I to the agreement and the specifications appended as Annexure II to the agreement.
4. The further case of the claimant is that on 19.03.2012 due to non payment of bills and pendency for over six months, a request was made to clear the pending bills. It was also informed by the contractor that due to non-availability of funds, the work on site is affe
An arbitral award may be set aside if the adjudicator fails to provide intelligible reasoning, resulting in findings that are contradictory and lacking foundation.
The scope of judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited to reasons of law and pertains to the arbitral tribunal's adherence to the contract terms and evidence presented.
The court affirmed the limited scope of review under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing respect for arbitral awards unless stark violations of public policy or procedural....
The court upheld that inaccurate findings in an arbitration award necessitate judicial interference, allowing for the severance of valid and invalid portions of the award.
The court confirmed the validity of the Arbitrator's findings regarding excess work claims and the correct application of interest, highlighting that overlapping interest claims were erroneous.
Judicial review of arbitral awards is limited; courts should not interfere unless there is clear evidence of perversity or violation of public policy.
The court emphasized the requirement for the arbitrator to assign reasons in support of the award and the limited scope of interference by the court in arbitration 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
