Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
National Highways Authority Of India Through Its Project Director – Appellant
Versus
Om Prakash Singh And 2 Others – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JASPREET SINGH, J.
1. Heard Sri Abhishek Pathak, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Prasidh Narayan Singh, learned counsel along with Sri J.N. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 on caveat.
2. The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1996") assailing the judgment and order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Additional District Judge-I, Ambedkar Nagar in Arbitration Case No. 4 of 2022 whereby the petition preferred under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 filed by the respondent no. 1 has been allowed and the matter has been remitted for consideration afresh.
3. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the Court while exercising powers under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 has overstepped its jurisdiction, inasmuch as, it has entered into the merits of the dispute and it has re-appraised the evidence which is not within the domain of the Court exercising powers under Section 34 of the Act of 1996.
4. It is further urged that where a view has been taken by an Arbitrator after considering the material available on record, unless it is shown to be pervers
The court affirmed that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, courts cannot re-evaluate the merits of an arbitral award and must adhere to jurisdictional limits under Section 34.
The court affirmed that under Section 34, a Civil Court lacks jurisdiction to reappraise evidence in arbitral awards and may only modify awards for clear errors, not on merits.
The Court can partially set aside an arbitral Award and has limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court cannot modify an Award but can set ....
Judicial review of an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds without reappraising evidence; the Court cannot modify awards based on merits.
The court clarified that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, the scope of review is limited to setting aside awards for patent illegality or public policy violations, not for modification.
The court affirmed that judicial intervention in arbitral awards is limited to grounds of public policy or patent illegality, emphasizing respect for the Arbitrator's findings.
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
