{"id":197539,"date":"2018-06-26T16:20:12","date_gmt":"2018-06-26T10:50:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=197539"},"modified":"2018-07-07T10:07:04","modified_gmt":"2018-07-07T04:37:04","slug":"arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/","title":{"rendered":"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: <\/strong>A Single Judge Bench comprising of Navin Chawla, J. allowed a miscellaneous petition filed under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, against the order of the Arbitrator wherein he did not consider the second part of the prayer made by the petitioner.<\/p>\n

The petitioner was the successful bidder for certain commercial plot in an auction sale conducted by the respondent, for which he had paid Rs. 5.52 crores, being the entire bid amount. He also purchased stamp duty worth Rs. 33,12,040. However, the respondent failed to execute the lease deed. Consequently, the petitioner demanded from the respondent, 15% p.a. interest on earnest money deposit (EDM), bid amount and stamp duty. Learned Arbitrator in his impugned award, found the reference in favour of the petitioner and directed the respondent to pay back the entire amount of stamp duty purchased by the petitioner along with 9% p.a. interest thereon. The petitioner was aggrieved by non-consideration of his prayer regarding the bid amount and EDM. The issue was before the High Court in the instant petition filed by the petitioner.<\/p>\n

The High Court considered the submission of the respondent that since the Arbitrator did not grant the said prayer made by the petitioner, it must be deemed to have been rejected. The Court rejected such submission of the respondent. There was no discussion in the award on the above-said prayer. The Court observed that in terms of Section 31(3) of the Act, the Arbitrator had to state the reasons upon which the order is passed. If the claim made by the petitioner was to be rejected, Arbitrator has to give reasons for the same. One cannot assume rejection of prayer and, further, the reasons therefor. <\/em>The High Court held that clearly, the Arbitrator did not consider the prayer as far as bid amount and EDM was concerned. Thus, the High Court directed the petitioner to reagitate such claims under proper proceedings. The petition was disposed of in above terms. [Surajmal Yadav v. DSIIDC Ltd.,\u00a0 2018 SCC OnLine Del 9555<\/a>,dated 24-05-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Navin Chawla, J. allowed a miscellaneous petition filed under Section 34 of Arbitration <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2831,30679,30678,30677],"class_list":["post-197539","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Auction","tag-bid-amount","tag-earnest-money-deposit","tag-lease-deed"],"yoast_head":"\nArbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Navin Chawla, J. allowed a miscellaneous petition filed under Section 34 of Arbitration\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-06-26T10:50:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-07T04:37:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/\",\"name\":\"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-06-26T10:50:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-07T04:37:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0","og_description":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Navin Chawla, J. allowed a miscellaneous petition filed under Section 34 of Arbitration","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-06-26T10:50:12+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-07T04:37:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/","name":"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-06-26T10:50:12+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-07T04:37:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/26\/arbitrator-has-to-state-reasons-for-the-order-passed-under-section-301-a-non-granting-of-prayer-does-not-by-itself-means-rejection-thereof\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Arbitrator has to state reasons for the order passed under Section 30(1) A&C Act; non-granting of prayer does not by itself means rejection thereof \u00a0"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":259517,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/04\/arbitral-tribunal-finds-sjda-at-fault\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":0},"title":"Arbitral Tribunal finds SJDA at fault; directs to refund bid amount of Rs 84.24 crores to the claimant in New Township Project\u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"January 4, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Arbitral Tribunal, New Delhi: The Arbitral Tribunal comprising of B.P. Singh (Retd.), A.K. Patnaik (Retd.) and Gyan Sudha Misra (Retd.), JJ., directed\u00a0 SJDA to refund the bid amount Rs.84.24 crores deposited by the claimant with regard to New Township Project. Finding the respondent at fault, the Tribunal stated in the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243660,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/10\/del-hc-on-invocation-of-arbitration-clause-if-a-party-appoints-arbitrator-on-its-own-and-does-not-receive-confirmation-from-another-party-should-former-approach-court-under-s-11-of-arbitration-ac\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":1},"title":"Del HC | On invocation of arbitration clause, if a party appoints arbitrator on its own and does not receive confirmation from another party, should former approach Court under S. 11 of Arbitration Act? HC discusses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Kameswar Rao, J., decided a petition wherein on the invocation of the arbitration clause, one of the parties appointed the sole arbitrator on its own. The instant petition was filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Petitioner and the respondents entered into a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":310485,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/01\/calcutta-high-court-upholds-forfeiture-of-earnest-money-in-e-auction-sale-dispute-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":2},"title":"Calcutta High Court upholds forfeiture of earnest money in e-auction sale dispute","author":"Ritu","date":"January 1, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court stated that the terms of the e-auction notice explicitly stated the conditions of the sale, including the forfeiture clause in case of non-compliance by the bidder.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269082,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/27\/calcutta-high-court-order-xli-rule-51-of-the-cpc-grants-the-court-discretion-to-stay-the-execution-of-a-decree-for-sufficient-cause-award-by-arbitral-tribunal-upheld\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":3},"title":"Calcutta High Court| Order XLI, Rule 5(1) of the CPC grants the court discretion to stay the execution of a decree for ‘sufficient cause’; Award by arbitral tribunal upheld","author":"Editor","date":"June 27, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Calcutta High Court: Shekhar B. Saraf, J. upheld the award granted by the Arbitral Tribunal holding that the award holder should be secured for the entirety of the amount along with interest and other costs. The petitioner had filed this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court-2.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court-2.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court-2.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":276868,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/05\/prayer-for-appointment-arbitrator-cannot-rejected-ground-vague-bereft-of-material-particulars-gujarathighcourt-legal-update-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":4},"title":"Gujarat High Court | Notice for appointment of arbitrator cannot be rejected on ground of vague material particulars","author":"Editor","date":"November 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Gujarat High Court: While deciding the instant petition, Aravind Kumar, C.J., said that the prayer for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation (\u2018A&C\u2019) Act, 2016 cannot be rejected on the ground that it is vague or bereft of the material particulars as\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Gujarat High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":208654,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/23\/bom-hc-under-s-34-of-ac-act-court-has-to-see-whether-the-view-taken-by-arbitrator-is-a-judicially-possible-view\/","url_meta":{"origin":197539,"position":5},"title":"Bom HC | Under S. 34 of A&C Act, Court has to see whether the view taken by Arbitrator is a judicially possible view","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 23, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: The Bench of S.C. Gupte, J. while addressing an arbitration petition challenging the award passed by a sole arbitrator, noted the points of evidence asserted by the sole arbitrator and dismissed the petition. In the present petition, the crux of the issue involved an agreement for manufacturing\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197539","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=197539"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197539\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197539"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=197539"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=197539"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}