Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.PANIGRAHI
Chief Engineer (EZ-II), Central Public Works Department, Patna – Appellant
Versus
Karunakar Mohanty – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of contract and arbitration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments on the rescission of contract. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. respondent's defense against appeal. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. judicial review principles under sections 34 and 37. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 5. judgment on grounds of arbitration and appeal. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. ratio decidendi on merit of the appeal. (Para 34 , 35) |
| 7. conclusion and dismissal of appeal. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “A&C Act”) has been filed against the judgment dated 16.11.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar in Arbitration Proceeding No.183 of 2010 wherein the learned District Judge has dismissed the petition filed under Section 34 of the A&C Act thereby confirming the award dated 12.07.2010 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator in Arbitration Case No.63 of 2007.
2. That, the brief facts of the case are that a tender was floated by the Central Public Works Department (hereinafter referred to as “the Department” for
Judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act is significantly limited, focusing solely on jurisdictional errors or procedural irregularities with no reassessment....
The court reaffirmed that judicial intervention in arbitration under Sections 34 and 37 is limited to ensuring no substantial legal errors occurred, emphasizing the importance of respecting the arbit....
The court emphasized that judicial interference with arbitral awards is strictly limited, focusing only on issues of public policy or jurisdictional errors and cannot re-evaluate the merits of the aw....
Appeal against arbitral award – Courts should not interfere with arbitral award lightly in a casual and a cavalier manner--Mere possibility of an alternative view on facts or interpretation of contra....
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.
The limited scope of appellate review under the Arbitration Act prohibits courts from reassessing arbitral findings unless demonstrable procedural or jurisdictional errors are shown.
Judicial scrutiny under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited; courts must respect arbitral awards unless proven to violate public policy or statutory obligations, affirming the principle t....
Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the scope for setting aside an arbitral award under Sections 34 and 37 is limited, emphasizing the need for substantial legal grounds and deference to arbi....
(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....
The court upheld the arbitral award, affirming that contractual obligations prevail over departmental instructions, and emphasized the limited scope of appellate review under the Arbitration and Conc....
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
