Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Isgec Heavy Engineering Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case regarding contractor's engagement. (Para 2) |
| 2. court observations on arbitration process. (Para 3) |
| 3. appellant's arguments against arbitration ruling. (Para 4) |
| 4. respondent's defense on delivery delays. (Para 5) |
| 5. legal question on liquidated damages justification. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. nature of liquidated damages as non-mandatory. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. final court opinion supporting arbitral conclusion. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 8. dismissal of appeal and costs. (Para 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT
Harpreet Kaur Jeewan, J.
The present appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 23.01.2023 passed by the Additional District Judge, Patiala, whereby the objection petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by the appellant challenging the Arbitration Award dated 28.09.2020 passed by the Arbitration Tribunal was dismissed.
2. As per the facts on record, the respondent-contractor (hereinafter referred to as "the contractor") is engaged in providing engineering products such as process Equipment, Power Plants, Boilers, Plants and Machinery, Mechnical and Hydraulic Presses, Steel and Iron Castings, Contract Manu
The court emphasized that an arbitral award must be reasoned and address core contractual issues, with judicial intervention restricted to cases of patent illegality under Section 34 of the Arbitrati....
The interpretation of contractual clauses by an Arbitrator cannot be interfered with unless it is unreasonable or against settled legal principles.
The court affirmed that arbitral awards may only be set aside under specific grounds stated in Section 34, emphasizing judicial restraint from reevaluating evidence or merits beyond legal provisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court should not interfere with an arbitral award unless the arbitrator's conclusions are arbitrary, capricious, or perverse. The court's ....
The Court's power while exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Act is limited, and it cannot undertake an independent assessment on the merits of the Award.
The court can set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 if it violates substantive law, contract terms, or public policy, especially when procedural requirements aren't met or if the award is pate....
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
