Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Pyari Mohan Mohanty – Respondent
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 issued by the Railway.
ii. The work was awarded to the present Respondent vide letter of acceptance dated 7.4.1992 at the value of Rs.1,66,600/- for completion of work within three months from the date of the letter of acceptance. The original date of completion was thus stipulated to be 3.7.1992.
iii. However, the present Respondent did not complete the work on time and made two requests for extension of time, which were allowed and the time for completion was extended up to 31.5.1993
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....
(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....
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
