{"id":260226,"date":"2022-01-17T15:00:55","date_gmt":"2022-01-17T09:30:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=260226"},"modified":"2022-01-17T15:14:28","modified_gmt":"2022-01-17T09:44:28","slug":"2021-scc-vol-9-part-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/","title":{"rendered":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Ranging from Arbitration, Service Law to Family Law, this Volume 9 Part 1 brings in some very carefully and expertly analysed Judgments of the Supreme Court. Do check out the short notes of these cases that have been expertly created by our team of legal editors.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 34 \u2014 Jurisdiction of Court under \u2014 Scope of \u2014 Modification of arbitral award by Court under \u2014 Impermissibility of: <\/strong>Power of Court under S. 34 to \u201cset aside\u201d award, held, does not include power to modify such an award. Given limited scope of judicial interference with award under S. 34 on extremely limited grounds not dealing with merits of an award, \u201climited remedy\u201d under S. 34, held, is coterminous with \u201climited right\u201d, namely, either to set aside an award or remand matter under circumstances mentioned in S. 34. Scheme of S. 34 of the A&C Act, 1996 distinguished from scheme prevailing under the Arbitration Act, 1940. Lastly held, S. 34 jurisdiction cannot be assimilated with revisional jurisdiction under S. 115 CPC. [NHAI v. M. Hakeem, (2021) 9 SCC 1<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 \u2014 Or. 7 R. 11(d) and S. 11:<\/strong> Rejection of plaint where suit appears from statement in plaint to be barred by any law. Applicability of bar of res judicata cannot be determined at stage of rejection of plaint. The same can only be determined upon trial of the suit. Plaint in subsequent suit cannot be rejected on ground that it is barred by principles of res judicata as same will require production of pleadings, issues framed and judgment in previous suit, to compare it with present suit and that cannot be done for deciding an application under Or. 7 R. 11(d), as only the averments in the plaint itself may be considered at this stage. [Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat, (2021) 9 SCC 99<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Courts, Tribunals and Judiciary \u2014 Judicial Process \u2014 Role of the Bar, Administration and Public Institutions\/Officers:<\/strong> In this case, prayer was made for expunction of adverse remarks made against appellant, a senior lawyer, by High Court while deciding four cases in which appellant was representing one of the contesting parties. The Court observed that while it is of fundamental importance in realm of administration of justice to allow Judges to discharge their functions freely and fearlessly without interference from anyone, it is equally important for Judges to exercise restraint and avoid unnecessary remarks on conduct of counsel which has no bearing on adjudication of dispute. [Neeraj Garg v. Sarita Rani, (2021) 9 SCC 92<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 S. 482 \u2014 Quashment application:<\/strong> Principles summarized regarding manner of consideration of quashment application, at: (A) Stage of FIR\/complaint, as contrasted with (B) When proceedings are at stage when statements are recorded, evidence is collected and chargesheet is filed after conclusion of investigation\/inquiry. Restraint to be exercised by High Court while exercising inherent jurisdiction under S. 482. [Kaptan Singh v. State of U.P., (2021) 9 SCC 35<\/a> ]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 Ss. 432, 433 and 433-A \u2014 Power of appropriate Government to suspend, remit and commute sentences: <\/strong>Remission policies may be composite ones referable both to S. 432\/S. 433 CrPC and Art. 161 of the Constitution. Remission power exercisable under a particular remission policy whether would be one exercisable: (A) under S. 432\/S. 433 CrPC, and\/or (B) under Art. 161 of the Constitution, inter alia, depends on: the terms of the remission policy in question, the nature of the sentence imposed, and, the actual period of imprisonment served by the prisoner concerned. In respect of sentences of the nature mentioned in S. 433-A CrPC, if the actual period of imprisonment is not less than 14 yrs, then appropriate Government is free to exercise its powers under S. 432\/S. 433 CrPC, with or without approval of the Governor. However, in respect of sentences of the nature mentioned in S. 433-A CrPC, if actual period of imprisonment is less than 14 yrs, then remission power is only exercisable by Governor under Art. 161 of the Constitution on aid and advice of State Government as restrictions under S. 433-A CrPC cannot apply to constitutional power under Art. 161 of the Constitution. Furthermore, applicable sentence remission policy, reiterated, must be the one existing on date of conviction of accused and not the one existing on the date of consideration of his case for premature release by appropriate authority. [State of Haryana v. Raj Kumar, (2021) 9 SCC 292<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 Ss. 482 and 156(3) \u2014 Extraordinary relief of stay of further proceedings in complaint cases, including stay on arrest of accused persons \u2014 Grant of, by High Court under S. 482: <\/strong>It is permissible for High Court to pass an interim order under S. 482 CrPC of the nature impugned herein, in exceptional cases with caution and circumspection, giving at least brief reasons. What is not permissible is the tendency of the courts to pass blanket, cryptic, laconic, non-speaking orders reading merely \u201cno coercive steps shall be adopted\u201d. A.P. Mahesh Coop. [Urban bank Shareholders Welfare Assn. v. Ramesh Kumar Bung, (2021) 9 SCC 152<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Disaster Management Act, 2005 \u2014 Ss. 12(iii), 48, 6(1) and 6(2)(g) \u2014 Notified disaster:<\/strong> Ex gratia monetary compensation to families of deceased who have succumbed to pandemic of COVID-19: Word \u201cshall\u201d used in S. 12, held, cannot be interpreted and considered as \u201cmay\u201d. It is mandatory for National Authority to recommend guidelines for minimum standards of relief to be provided to persons affected by disasters including ex gratia assistance on account of loss of life. However, held, Court cannot issue writ directing Central Government\/National Authority\/State Governments to pay a particular amount by way of ex gratia assistance. [Reepak Kansal v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 251<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Family and Personal Laws\u2014 Hindu Law \u2014 Partition\/Family Arrangement\/Settlement \u2014 Revocation\/Cancellation\/Reunion\/Blending\/Surrender\/Relinquishment\/Renunciation \u2014 Reunion of family:<\/strong> Concept of reunion of joint family, manner in which to be proved, presumption against reunion after partition, principles explained in detail. [R. Janakiammal v. S.K. Kumarasamy, (2021) 9 SCC 114<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Government Contracts and Tenders \u2014 Formation of Government Contract \u2014 Modes of entering into a Government Contract \u2014 Public Auction\/Tender \u2014 Tender Conditions\/Criteria\/Norms\/Request for Proposal (RFP) Conditions\/Notice Inviting Tender (NIT)\/Advertisement\/Invitation to offer\/Reserve price\/Prequalifications\/Scope of judicial review:<\/strong> In this case, one of clauses of NIT stipulating that notification of award will constitute formation of contract \u201csubject only\u201d to furnishing of security deposit. Letter of intent (LoI) in this case was merely a letter of intent and not a concluded contract. Bidder failed to comply with preconditions specified in NIT and in LoI. Consequently work order was not issued nor was contract executed. Thus, held, there was no concluded contract between parties. Mobilisation at site by bidder would not amount to concluding contract. Thus, held, cancellation of award work and forfeiture of bid security not illegal. However, held, in this case High Court correctly held that appellant employer not entitled to recover differential amount in the contract value between bid of respondent and the new contractor to whom the contract was finally awarded. [South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. S. Kumar’s Associates AKM (JV), (2021) 9 SCC 166<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Human and Civil Rights \u2014 Humanitarian and Natural Disasters, Epidemics and Pandemics \u2014 Epidemics and Pandemics \u2014 COVID-19 Pandemic \u2014 Public health response:<\/strong> There was daily requirement of 700 MT of oxygen for National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) and obligation of Central Government and allegedly, Central Government defaulted in providing 700 MT of oxygen to NCTD on daily basis, hence directions and clarifications issued. Central Government directed to remedy the situation forthwith. Plea that this would affect oxygen supply to other States and Union Territories (UTs), is not tenable. Plea based on method of computation for arriving at said requirement, also not tenable. [Union of India v. Rakesh Malhotra, (2021) 9 SCC 222<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Human and Civil Rights \u2014 Humanitarian and Natural Disasters, Epidemics and Pandemics \u2014 Epidemics and Pandemics \u2014 COVID-19 Pandemic \u2014 Public health response: <\/strong>There was daily requirement of 700 MT of oxygen for National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) and it was the obligation of Central Government to supply oxygen. The High Court initiated contempt proceedings for non-compliance with directions for performance of said obligation. Contempt notice by High Court stayed as no useful purpose would be served thereby. It was clarified that said restraint order would not affect High Court from continuing to monitor issues therein. Issues requiring attention have many dimensions like proper method for computing requirement of oxygen, proper management of the resource of oxygen, scientific audit of the requirement of oxygen and replicating efficient administrative modalities of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. [Union of India v. Rakesh Malhotra, (2021) 9 SCC 241<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 S. 323 r\/w S. 319:<\/strong> Production of an injury report, held, not a sine qua non for establishing case under S. 323. Non-visible injuries and even causing bodily pain, held, come within ambit of causing \u201churt\u201d. Thus, non-production of injury report, held, not fatal, when offence under S. 323 proved otherwise based on evidence on record. [Lakshman Singh v. State of Bihar, (2021) 9 SCC 191<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 S. 364-A \u2014 Kidnapping for ransom \u2014 Ingredients of offence \u2014 Necessity to prove each and every ingredient prescribed in S. 364-A:<\/strong> All conditions as enumerated in S. 364-A must be fulfilled before recording conviction under S. 364-A. First essential condition, held, must mandatorily be established with at least any one of the three conditions mentioned thereafter also being affirmatively established, to ground conviction under S. 364-A. [Sk. Ahmed v. State of Telangana, (2021) 9 SCC 59<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 \u2014 Ss. 32, 33 and 47 \u2014 Reservation in promotion for persons with disabilities:<\/strong> Reservation in promotion cannot be denied to persons with disabilities. Such reservation cannot be confined to initial stage of induction of service resulting in stagnation of disabled. Further held, operation of reservation and computation must be made with reference to total number of vacancies in cadre strength and no distinction should be made between posts to be filled by direct recruitment and by promotion. Moreover, Rules must be framed providing for promotion from feeder cadre to promotional posts and posts must be identified in terms of S. 32 in promotional cadre capable of being filled by persons with disabilities. [State of Kerala v. Leesamma Joseph (2021) 9 SCC 208<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Judiciary \u2014 Compulsory retirement \u2014 Report\/decision of Vigilance\/Disciplinary Committee \u2014 Binding effect \u2014 If any:<\/strong> In this case, Full Court of High Court recommended compulsory retirement of petitioner from post of Additional District & Sessions Judge for irregular deposits\/withdrawal from his bank account, rejecting reports of Vigilance\/Disciplinary Committee dt. 17-10-2018 and 18- 12-2019 exonerating him. The Supreme Court held, decision\/report of Vigilance\/Disciplinary Committee not binding on Full Court. On facts it was held, considering that there were multiple transactions showing deposits and withdrawals of substantial amounts of money, Full Court was justified in taking the view it did and no interference with impugned judgment called for. [Rajinder Goel v. High Court of P&H, (2021) 9 SCC 88<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Practice and Procedure \u2014 Parties \u2014 Necessary\/Proper parties \u2014 Prayer for impleadment \u2014 Grant of \u2014 Sufficient interest in outcome of proceedings:<\/strong> In this case, Police officers belonging to IPS seeking impleadment in instant SLPs which arise out of common judgment delivered by High Court in five writ petitions filed by Group A officers of the Central Armed Police Forces, apprehending that posts in CAPFs allocated for filling up by deputation by officers of IPS would get diluted in event main plea of petitioners to exclude deputationists from senior administrative posts of respective CAPFs was accepted. It was held that applicants establish sufficient interest in outcome of proceedings, hence, application for impleadment was allowed. [Sanjay Prakash v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 79<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 \u2014 S. 58(c) and proviso thereto \u2014 Conditional sale mortgage, or, absolute sale with right of repurchase \u2014 Determination of:<\/strong> Converse, whether true i.e. merely because entire transaction is contained in one document it would necessarily imply that it is a conditional sale mortgage. Rather, whether the intention of the parties has also to be ascertained to determine the true nature of the transaction. It is impossible to compare one case with another. Each case must be decided on its own facts and circumstances. The document has to read as a whole and court must determine the true intention of the parties as to the nature of the transaction they intended. If the sale and agreement to repurchase are embodied in separate documents then the transaction cannot be a conditional sale mortgage irrespective of whether the documents are contemporaneously executed, as that would be contrary to requirements of S. 58(c) proviso. [Bhimrao Ramchandra Khalate v. Nana Dinkar Yadav, (2021) 9 SCC 45<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Wakf Act, 1995 \u2014 S. 83: <\/strong>Scope of revisional jurisdiction of High Court is limited. Principles summarized regarding when interference is justified. [Telangana State Wakf Board v. Mohd. Muzafar, (2021) 9 SCC 179<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ranging from Arbitration, Service Law to Family Law, this Volume 9 Part 1 brings in some very carefully and expertly analysed Judgments <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":249204,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[4751,48378,11411],"class_list":["post-260226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-scc","tag-2021-scc-vol-9-part-1","tag-supreme-court-cases"],"yoast_head":"\n2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1\" \/>\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\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/\" \/>\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=\"2022-01-17T09:30:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-01-17T09:44:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\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=\"10 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\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/\",\"name\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-01-17T09:30:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-01-17T09:44:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1\"}]},{\"@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":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1 | SCC Times","description":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1","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\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1","og_description":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-01-17T09:30:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-01-17T09:44:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/","name":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","datePublished":"2022-01-17T09:30:55+00:00","dateModified":"2022-01-17T09:44:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/17\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-1\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 1"}]},{"@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":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":217158,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/23\/extent-of-judicial-review-in-foreign-awards-whether-arbitration-and-conciliation-amendment-act-2015-expanded-the-scope-of-public-policy-in-section-48-of-the-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":0},"title":"Extent of Judicial Review in Foreign Awards: Whether Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 expanded the scope of \u201cPublic Policy\u201d in Section 48 of the Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 23, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"by Soumyajit Saha\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/AdobeStock_122928222.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/AdobeStock_122928222.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/AdobeStock_122928222.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/AdobeStock_122928222.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/AdobeStock_122928222.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":379030,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/22\/2026-scc-vol-2-part-4-latest-supreme-court-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":1},"title":"2026 SCC Vol. 2 Part 4: Key Supreme Court Cases on Arbitration and Criminal Law","author":"Sonali Ahuja","date":"March 22, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases in 2026 SCC Vol. 2 Part 2 on international commercial arbitration, limited scope of interference under Section 37, and registration of FIR.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"2026 SCC Vol. 2 Part 4","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/2026-SCC-Vol.-2-Part-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/2026-SCC-Vol.-2-Part-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/2026-SCC-Vol.-2-Part-4.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/2026-SCC-Vol.-2-Part-4.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":251618,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/22\/arbitral-award-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":2},"title":"Can Courts modify Arbitral Awards under S. 34 of Arbitration Act or is power limited? SC decides","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 22, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ., while addressing a significant and interesting question of law expressed that, \"If one were to include the power to modify an award in Section 34, one would be crossing the Lakshman Rekha\" Interesting Question of Law Whether 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\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299856,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/23\/court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-under-s34-arbitration-act-supreme-court-reiterates\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Court cannot modify arbitral award under Section 34 of Arbitration Act’: Supreme Court reiterates","author":"Ridhi","date":"August 23, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court explained that the older Act enabled the Court to modify an award, a power which was consciously omitted by Parliament while enacting the 1996 Act, hinting towards exclusion of power to modify an award.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"court cannot modify arbitral award","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269950,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/12\/rajasthan-high-court-no-award-can-be-remitted-to-the-arbitrator-where-there-are-no-findings-in-the-contentious-issues-of-the-award\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":4},"title":"Rajasthan High Court | No award can be remitted to the arbitrator where there are no findings in the contentious issues of the award","author":"Editor","date":"July 12, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Rajasthan High Court: Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. found that the writ petition by the petitioner lacks merit and dismissed it stating that no award can be remitted back to the arbitrator where there are no findings on the contentious issues of the award. The petitioner filed a writ\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":240351,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/09\/supreme-court-confirms-pre-balco-foreign-awards-cannot-be-challenged-under-section-34-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":260226,"position":5},"title":"Supreme Court confirms pre-BALCO foreign awards cannot be challenged under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act","author":"Editor","date":"December 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The question before the division bench of Ravindra Bhat and Indira Banerjee, JJ. was whether a foreign award rendered in the pre BALCO[1] era, could be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The facts in brief were that the respondent and another company \u2018Enco\u2019\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\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260226","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=260226"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260226\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/249204"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}