Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Pyari Mohan Mohanty – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case and contract details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. appellant's arguments against the arbitral award. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. respondent's counterarguments defending the arbitral award. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. judicial standards for reviewing arbitral awards. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 20) |
| 5. judiciary's limited scope in reviewing arbitration outcomes. (Para 19 , 23 , 25 , 27 , 30) |
| 6. conclusion endorsing the initial judgment and arbitral award. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
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 24.10.2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Khurda in ARB(P) No.104 of 2011 arising out of award dated 31.1.2011passed by the Ld. Sole Arbitrator in Arbitration Proceeding No.1 of 2002.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
2. For the sake of brevity, the facts involved in the appeal are pithily discussed herein:
i. The Railways entered into an agreement dated 4.11.1992 with the present Respondent for executing the work i.e. roof treatment with Tar-felting to Service and Residential building pursuant to tender notice is
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....
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....
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....
(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....
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 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 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....
(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....
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
