{"id":283160,"date":"2023-02-04T16:00:46","date_gmt":"2023-02-04T10:30:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=283160"},"modified":"2023-02-10T09:21:20","modified_gmt":"2023-02-10T03:51:20","slug":"delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/b> In a petition filed under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company, primarily dealing in the area of large application pumps that has diversified into the power sector seeking to set aside the arbitral award passed by the Sole Arbitrator on the grounds of the arbitral award being ex-facie erroneous and suffering from patent illegality, Chandra Dhari Singh, J., held that on the application of the rule of contra proferentem<\/i>, the Purchase Order was fittingly interpreted by the Sole Arbitrator, leaving no scope for the interference of this Court on the Award.<\/p>\n

The Respondent was engaged by the Petitioner as the manufacturer and supplier of customized towers and other ancillary goods as per the specifications and other details provided the respondent for transmission lines to be erected for its client JUSNL. According to the Respondent, as per the contract, the Petitioner was to provide structural drawings, shop sketches, and BOM of items to the Respondent. According to the Petitioners, as per the mutual agreement between the parties, the approvals and drawings were to come from the Respondent.<\/p>\n

The transaction between the parties lasted for a brief duration of 3 months, after which it was prematurely terminated by the Petitioner based on the alleged delay and breach of contractual obligations by the Respondent. An application under Section 9<\/a> of the Act, 1996<\/a> was filed by the respondent and a sole arbitrator was appointed who awarded a sum of Rs, 8,15,05,674\/- to the Claimant\/Respondent, aggrieved by which the Petitioner filed the instant petition.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that “patent illegality” is an illegality that goes to the root of the matter but excludes the erroneous application of the law by an arbitral tribunal or re-appreciation of evidence by an appellate court. In this instant case, the Arbitral Award was a well-reasoned award, with the findings being clearly arrived at based on all the documents\/evidence on record. Thus, the Petitioner cannot have the benefit of the ‘ground of patent illegality’ to assail the impugned Arbitral Award under Section 34<\/a> of the Act, 1996<\/a>.<\/b><\/p>\n

The Court observed that the principle is that if arbitrators use the contract itself to determine a dispute, clauses should, in principle, be construed ‘contra proferentem’<\/i>, meaning that they should be interpreted against the party that drafted it. In the instant case, the Petitioner had drafted the Purchase Contract in which the Respondent was a signatory, the Arbitrator, having observed various interpretations of the contract, chose to endorse the interpretation that is favorable to the Respondent.<\/p>\n

The Court remarked that the application of the rule of contra proferentem validates the Sole Arbitrator’s findings and observations regarding the interpretation of the contract to decide the question of breach of the contract.<\/i><\/p>\n

The Court noted that the Petitioner claimed that the Arbitrator misappreciated the evidence on record, but a careful reading of the Award proves that the Arbitrator has rightly relied on relevant evidence to adjudicate.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court held that the impugned Arbitral Award is not in contravention of the law and has incorporated the evidence that was submitted before the Arbitral Tribunal to give well-balanced reasoning to it. The Petitioner was rightfully found to be guilty of breach of contract, which resulted in the Respondent incurring losses.<\/p>\n

[Flowmore Limited v. Skipper Limited, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 548<\/a>, decided on 02-02-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

Mr. Arvind Verma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Mr. Rohan Jaitley, Ms. Neoma Vasdev, Mr. Pratham Mehrotra, Ms. Mahima Chauhan and Ms. Smridhi Sharma, Advocates for the Petitioner;<\/p>\n

Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saurav Gupta and Ms. Sugandha Batra, Advocates for the Respondent.<\/p>\n\n

*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The ground of Patent illegality gives way to setting aside an Arbitral Award with a very minimal scope of intervention. A party cannot simply raise an objection on the ground of patent illegality if the Award is simply against them. Patent illegality requires a distinct transgression of law, the clear lack of which thereof makes the petition simply a pointless effort of objection towards an Award made by a competent Arbitral Tribunal.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":279267,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[3226,54980,2543,54982,54981,35210,27524,46868],"class_list":["post-283160","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitration","tag-contra-proferentem","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-fundamental-policy-of-india","tag-fundamental-policy-of-law","tag-patent-illegality","tag-section-34","tag-section-9"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company\" \/>\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\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/\" \/>\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=\"2023-02-04T10:30:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-02-10T03:51:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"391\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"311\" \/>\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\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-02-04T10:30:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-02-10T03:51:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg\",\"width\":391,\"height\":311,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019\"}]},{\"@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":"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019 | SCC Times","description":"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company","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\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019","og_description":"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-02-04T10:30:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-02-10T03:51:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":391,"height":311,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.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\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","name":"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","datePublished":"2023-02-04T10:30:46+00:00","dateModified":"2023-02-10T03:51:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the petitioner, a Public Limited Company","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","width":391,"height":311,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/04\/delhi-high-court-rule-of-contra-proferentem-to-uphold-arbitral-award-patent-illegal-against-fundamental-policy-of-indian-law-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court applies the rule of \u2018contra proferentem\u2019 to uphold the arbitral award not being hit by \u2018patent illegality\u2019"}]},{"@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\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":287192,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-partly-sets-aside-arbitral-award-passed-by-sole-arbitrator-being-patently-illegal-contrary-to-the-lines-of-contract-legal-news-research-awareness-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":283160,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Interest cannot be withheld in the absence of express provisions permitting the same\u2019; Delhi High Court partially sets aside arbitral award for being patently illegal","author":"Arunima","date":"March 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The impugned arbitral award was passed without considering the clauses of the Concessionaire Agreement while adjudicating on the rate of interest to be granted, thus, suffers from infirmity and patent illegality.","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\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"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":283160,"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":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":283160,"position":2},"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":290964,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/29\/agreement-specifying-no-interest-to-be-granted-takes-away-arbitrators-power-to-deviate-and-grant-his-own-interest-rate-delhi-high-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":283160,"position":3},"title":"Agreement specifying \u2018no interest to be granted\u2019 takes away Arbitrator’s power to deviate and grant his own interest rate: Delhi High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"April 29, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Even if the Arbitrator is successful in justifying his reasons for deciding a rate of interest, the Agreement between the parties being the birth-giver, should be held at a higher stature when it concerns an issue that has been pre-decided and mutually agreed upon by the parties.","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":284055,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/16\/delhi-high-court-upholds-arbitral-award-as-reappreciation-of-evidence-is-beyond-the-scope-of-section-37-arbitration-act-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","url_meta":{"origin":283160,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court finds no ground for interference as reappreciation of evidence is beyond the scope of Section 37 Arbitration Act","author":"Editor","date":"February 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The scope of a challenge under Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is limited to the grounds stipulated in Section 34 Arbitration Act.","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":298529,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/04\/delhi-hc-refuses-interference-arbitral-award-passed-against-indian-railway-patent-illegal\/","url_meta":{"origin":283160,"position":5},"title":"[S. 34 Arbitration Act] Delhi High Court refuses to interfere in Indian Railway’s plea regarding arbitral award being perverse","author":"Arunima","date":"August 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Indian Railway's has failed to substantiate its grounds for setting aside the impugned Arbitral Award that the impugned award suffers from patent illegality and the findings therein are perverse and would shock the conscience of this Court.","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\/05\/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\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/283160","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=283160"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/283160\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/279267"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=283160"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=283160"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=283160"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}