Back
ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL
Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Samir Narain Bhojwani – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Abhay S. Oka, J.
1. The application for permission to file special leave petition is allowed. Leave granted.
FACTUAL ASPECTS
2. These appeals take exception to the same judgment and order dated 7th July 2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Therefore, the same are being decided together. We are setting out a few factual aspects necessary for deciding the appeals.
3. On 31st March 1993, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) executed a lease agreement in respect of the subject property in favour of Andheri Kamgar Nagar Cooperative Housing Society Limited (for short, ‘the Society’). It is stated to be a society of slum dwellers. The Society, by the agreement dated 6th October 1996, appointed M/s. Aurora Properties and Investments (for short, ‘M/s. Aurora’) as the property developer to implement a slum rehabilitation scheme. M/s. Aurora was to construct 237 rehabilitation tenements for slum dwellers and 40 tenements for project-affected persons (PAPs) free of cost and develop the property using the available Floor Space Index (FSI) and dispose of the same. It appears that M/s. Aurora could not discharge its obligations. Therefore, by the
The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court dealing with an appeal under Section 37 against the judgment in a petition under Section 34 is more constrained than the jurisdiction of the Court dealing with....
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 court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to cases of patent illegality or perverse findings, respecting the finality of arbitration.
The court upheld the trial court's dismissal of the appeal against the arbitration award, confirming that there was no patent illegality or grounds for interference under the Arbitration and Concilia....
The court emphasized the wide scope of reference of the arbitrator and the appellant's failure to file a defense, highlighting the limited scope of interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration an....
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....
The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the statutory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, particularly regarding the filing of Section 34 applications during the pendency o....
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 affirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited, focusing on the necessity of cogent reasoning and adherence to public policy.
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
