Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI
Paradip Port Trust (PPT) – Appellant
Versus
Modi Projects Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the arbitration case. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10) |
| 2. arguments against the arbitral award's validity. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 3. legal standards for appellate review. (Para 19 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. mandatory nature of the 'vivad se vishwas ii' scheme. (Para 60 , 61 , 62) |
| 5. court's final decision on appeals. (Para 68 , 69) |
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
1. Since these applications arise from the same facts and involve the same parties, the same were taken up for hearing together and are being dealt with by this Common Judgment and Order
2. This Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “A&C Act” for brevity) has been filed seeking setting aside of the judgment dated 04.02.2023 passed by the learned District Judge, Jagatsinghpur in Arbitration Petition No.3 of 2019 arising out of arbitration award dated 12.04.2019 passed by the Ld. Sole Arbitrator Retd. Justice M.M.Das. The Writ Petition is preferred by the Respondent in ARBA No.8 of 2023 seeking a direction to the Appellant in ARBA No.8 of 2023 to accept the proposal submitted by the Respondent on 03.08.2023 in pursuance of the Vivad Se Viswas II Scheme.
3. As th
Judicial review under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited and requires interference only in cases of patent illegality or public policy violations; claims meeting the "Vivad....
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....
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....
The court affirmed that limited judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act does not allow for re-evaluation of arbitration awards unless they are demonstrably perverse, illegal, or devoi....
Under Section 34, courts cannot interfere with arbitral awards based on joint departmental reconciliations and admissions unless patent illegality apparent on award's face; limited to upholding final....
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of interference with arbitral awards and the principle that courts should not interfere with arbitral awards unless there is a patent illegality or violation....
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....
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....
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
