{"id":276434,"date":"2022-11-01T14:00:25","date_gmt":"2022-11-01T08:30:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=276434"},"modified":"2022-11-01T14:00:25","modified_gmt":"2022-11-01T08:30:25","slug":"uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/","title":{"rendered":"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

   <\/p>\n

Uttaranchal High Court<\/b>: The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (hereinafter “the Act”) and held that judgments passed by the Additional. District Judge, Commercial Court, Dehradun are liable to be set aside as it committed an error by partly upholding the award of the Arbitral Tribunal disallowing the three claims of the Contractor.<\/p>\n

In the present case, the Appellate Court rejected claim nos. 1 and 9 of the Contractor amounting to Rs. 33,66,989.86 and Rs. 2,00,000, whereas, the Original Court had rejected claim no. 7(b) of the Contractor amounting to Rs. 25,50,390. Further, Additional. District Judge, Commercial Court, Dehradun after re-appreciating the evidence, had set aside claim nos. 1, 9 and 7(b) decided in favor of the Contractor by the Arbitral Tribunal. The Contractor approached the High Court for restoration of his claims and Union of India approached this Court for setting aside judgment and Arbitral Awards.<\/p>\n

The question before the Court in this case is “Whether the Additional. District Judge, Commercial Court, Dehradun has jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Act to re-appreciate the evidence and modify the same?”<\/i>. The Court relied on the case of Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd.<\/i> v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.<\/i>, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 695<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court, in clear terms, has interpreted Section 34 of the Act and has recognized that restraint should be shown while examining the validity of the Arbitral Awards. Only when there is patent illegality, which goes to root of the matter or when there is contravention of law linking to public policy and public interest, then it is within the scope of the Court to take a different view and interfere with the findings.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the Counsel for the Union of India, neither in the oral arguments nor in the written arguments, has demonstrated that there has been a patent illegality going to root of the matter or that the Arbitral Award is against the public policy of India or that the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the law for the time being in force. Moreover, the Court observed that the Union of India has not made out any ground for setting aside of the award.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that that Additional. District Judge, Commercial Court, Dehradun committed an error by partly upholding the award of the Arbitral Tribunal disallowing the three claims of the Contractor. Moreover, it has not given any finding that if each of the claims, which were set aside, is a severable part of the award or not.<\/p>\n

The Court held that since the Additional. District Judge, Commercial Judge, Dehradun, has not found any manifest and patent error in the awards, therefore, the judgments passed by it cannot be sustained and are liable to be set aside.<\/p>\n

[Ravindra Kumar Gupta v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Utt 1279<\/a>, decided on 21-10-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Aditya Pratap Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant(s);<\/p>\n

V.K. Kaparwan, Advocate, for the Respondent(s).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":275480,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2633,10131,47046,42175,35263],"class_list":["post-276434","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitral_award","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-commercial-court","tag-union-of-india","tag-uttaranchal-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37\" \/>\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\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/\" \/>\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=\"2022-11-01T08:30:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.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=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 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\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/\",\"name\":\"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-11-01T08:30:25+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality | SCC Times","description":"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37","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\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality","og_description":"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-11-01T08:30:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/","name":"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg","datePublished":"2022-11-01T08:30:25+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, JJ. allowed appeals filed by the Contractor under Section 37","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/01\/uttaranchal-high-court-commercial-court-cannot-modify-arbitral-award-in-absence-of-manifest-and-patent-error-illegality\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Uttaranchal High Court | Commercial Court cannot modify arbitral award in absence of manifest and patent error\/illegality"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Uttaranchal-High-Court-1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":257179,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/17\/relief-under-s-9-of-the-arbitration-and-conciliation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":0},"title":"Relief under S. 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act: Can it be granted to a party who is not party to arbitration agreement? Read Utt HC\u2019s ruling","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 17, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Emphasizing on the purpose and object of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Division bench of Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ and Alok Kumar Verma, J., held that, A person not a party to an arbitration agreement cannot invoke jurisdiction of the Court for interim\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":325330,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/29\/what-is-scope-of-hcs-power-under-section-37-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-ori-hc-answers-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":1},"title":"Orissa High Court explains scope of High Court\u2019s power under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act","author":"Ritu","date":"June 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court held that the court\u2019s intervention is limited and emphasised on the autonomy of the arbitral process and the finality of the arbitral award.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Orissa High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Orissa-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Orissa-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Orissa-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Orissa-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":275309,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/10\/madras-high-court-arbitral-tribunal-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-arbitral-award-specific-relief-act-public-policy-specific-performance-legal-research-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":2},"title":"Madras High Court | Courts will not interfere or set aside an arbitral award, merely because an alternative view is possible; Adopt a hands-off approach","author":"Editor","date":"October 10, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Madras High Court: In an intra-Court appeal filed against the order of the single judge, whereby, the judge allowed the original petition filed by the respondents under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (\u2018the Act\u2019) and set aside the award, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Madras-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Madras-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Madras-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Madras-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Madras-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258571,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/16\/not-open-to-approach-m-p-arbitration-tribunal-in-reference-when-the-very-same-claim-is-already-decided-by-arbitrator-appointed-by-high-court-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":3},"title":"Not open to approach M.P. Arbitration Tribunal in reference when the very same claim is already decided by Arbitrator appointed by High Court: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"December 16, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of M. R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., held that where the Arbitrator appointed by the High Court had already declared the award, it is not open for parties to file a reference before M.P. Arbitration Tribunal with respect to the very claim\/claims which were\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\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291009,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/01\/section-34-of-arbitration-act-a-well-reasoned-arbitral-award-cannot-be-interfered-with-delhi-high-court-on-limited-scope-of-interference-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":4},"title":"[Section 34 of Arbitration Act] A well-reasoned arbitral award cannot be interfered with: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"May 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Arbitral Tribunal is a creature of Contract, and the Contract is the only basis on which the Learned Tribunal should adjudicate, apart from the general provisions of law and jurisprudence.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-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\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":231674,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/02\/pre-2015-arbitration-amendment-act-dispute-in-a-post-2015-era\/","url_meta":{"origin":276434,"position":5},"title":"Pre- 2015 Arbitration Amendment Act dispute in a post 2015 era","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 2, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Alisha Mehta* and Achintya Sharma**","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\/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":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/276434","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=276434"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/276434\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/275480"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=276434"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=276434"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=276434"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}