SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(SC) 832

RANJAN GOGOI, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Associate Builders – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Section 28 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, pertains to the rules applicable to the substance of the dispute in arbitration proceedings. It mandates that when the place of arbitration is situated in India, the arbitral tribunal shall decide the dispute in accordance with the substantive law for the time being in force in India, unless the arbitration agreement specifies otherwise (!) .

Additionally, this section emphasizes that the arbitral tribunal must decide in accordance with the terms of the contract and take into account the usages of trade applicable to the transaction (!) . The tribunal's construction and interpretation of the contract are within its jurisdiction, and such decisions are generally binding unless they are found to be outside the scope of the arbitration agreement or contrary to the substantive law (!) (!) .

Furthermore, the section underscores that the tribunal's decisions should align with the principles of natural justice, including the requirement that parties are treated equally and are given a full opportunity to present their case (!) . The tribunal's obligation to decide based on the contract and relevant trade practices means that its interpretation of contractual terms is primarily a matter for its discretion, provided it is reasonable and within the terms of the agreement (!) (!) .

In summary, Section 28 enforces that arbitral tribunals decide disputes in accordance with the substantive law of India and the terms of the contract, while also adhering to principles of natural justice and reasonableness in their interpretation and decision-making processes.


JUDGMENT

R.F. Nariman,J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant herein was awarded a certain construction work contract by the DDA vide a letter of award dated 14th May, 1992. DDA was building a colony consisting of 7,000 houses in Trilok Puri in the trans-Yamuna area. 168 Middle Income Group houses and 56 Lower Income Group houses, Grade-A Pocket-B (balance work) was awarded for the tendered amount of Rs.87,66,678/-. The contract was to be completed in 9 months. Admittedly, it was ultimately completed only in 34 months, the contractor completing 166 Middle Income Group houses and 36 Lower Income Group houses. The total value of work that was done amounted to Rs.62,84,845/-. As many as 15 claims were made by the contractor and the High Court of Delhi appointed one Shri K.D. Bali to arbitrate the present dispute.

3. We are concerned here with claims 9, 10, 11 and 15, for these claims have been allowed by the Arbitrator and the DDA’s objections have been dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi. The Division Bench in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 has stepped in to set aside the judgment of the Single Judge and negative these claims. We ar









































































































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top