{"id":327979,"date":"2024-08-03T16:30:15","date_gmt":"2024-08-03T11:00:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=327979"},"modified":"2024-08-07T17:58:58","modified_gmt":"2024-08-07T12:28:58","slug":"judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/","title":{"rendered":"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In a special leave petition filed against the judgment and order of the division bench of the Delhi High Court, wherein the Court remand the proceedings to the Single Judge for reconsidering the petition under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996<\/a>, observing that the validity of the award of refund and the grant of interest appears in the context of examining the correctness of the judgment rendered by the Single Judge alone, the Three Judge Bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI, J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, JJ. while agreeing with the reasoning which led the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court to remand the proceedings to the Single Judge, said that interference with an arbitral award under Section 34 must be confined to the grounds which are permissible under the statute. But equally, the Judge hearing an application under Section 34 must apply their mind to the grounds of challenge and then deduce as to whether a case for interference within the parameters of Section 34 has been made out.<\/p>\n

After perusing the Single Judge order, the Court remarked that “there is no discernible reason which has weighed with the Single Judge. There has been no consideration of the arguments which were urged before the Single Judge<\/span>”.<\/p>\n

After noting the impugned Judgment, the Court viewed that the Division Bench did not err in remitting the proceedings to the Single Judge.<\/p>\n

In the facts and circumstances, the Court requested the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to assign the hearing of the petition under Section 34 to a Judge other than the Judge who heard and passed the impugned order.<\/p>\n

The Court clarified that since the Division Bench of the High Court has remanded the proceedings to the Single Judge for reconsidering the petition under Section 34 which order has been affirmed by this Court, all the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

CASE DETAILS<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n
\n

Citation:<\/span>
2024 SCC OnLine SC 1876<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Appellants :<\/span>
Kalanithi Maran<\/p>\n

Respondents :<\/span>
Ajay Singh<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

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

For Petitioner(s):<\/span>
Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gauhar Mirza, Adv. Ms. Hiral Gupta, Adv. Ms. Bhumika Kapoor, Adv. ,Ms. Sukanya Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Seem, Adv. M\/s. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Ms. Nandini Gore, Adv. Ms. Sonia Nigam, Adv. Mr. Rajat Dasgupta, Adv. Mr. Akarsh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rangasaran Mohan, Adv. M\/s. Karanjawala & Co.<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span>
Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu, AOR Mr. Goutham Shivashankar, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma A S, Adv. Mr. Tushar Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Manan Shishodia, Adv. Mr. Prakhar Agarwal, Adv<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

CORAM :<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\"Dr.
Dr. DY Chandrachud, CJI.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"J.B.
J.B. Pardiwala, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\"Manoj
Manoj Misra, J.<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court requested the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to assign the hearing of the petition under Section 34 to a Judge other than the Judge who heard and passed the impugned order.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":327985,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[71683,2633,2543,61989,71682,49365,55018,15391,71681,5363],"class_list":["post-327979","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-application-for-setting-aside-arbitral-awards","tag-arbitral_award","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-dr-justice-dy-chandrachud","tag-grounds-of-challenge","tag-justice-j-b-pardiwala","tag-justice-manoj-misra","tag-remand","tag-s-34-arbitration-act","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\n\u2018Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019: SC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019\" \/>\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\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-08-03T11:00:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-08-07T12:28:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\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\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/\",\"name\":\"\u2018Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019: SC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-08-03T11:00:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-08-07T12:28:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"S. 34 Arbitration Act\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC\"}]},{\"@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\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u2018Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019: SC | SCC Times","description":"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019","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\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC","og_description":"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-08-03T11:00:15+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-08-07T12:28:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/","name":"\u2018Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019: SC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp","datePublished":"2024-08-03T11:00:15+00:00","dateModified":"2024-08-07T12:28:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"SC upheld Delhi HC order remanding matter to Single Judge and said that Judge hearing S. 34 application must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required\u2019","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"S. 34 Arbitration Act"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/03\/judge-hearing-s-34-application-must-apply-mind-to-grounds-of-challenge-deduce-whether-interference-required-sc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Judge hearing application under S. 34 Arbitration Act must apply mind to grounds of challenge and deduce whether interference is required: SC"}]},{"@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\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/S.-34-Arbitration-Act.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":257196,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/17\/decreeing-a-claim-while-exercising-jurisdiction-under-section-37-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-impermissible-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":0},"title":"Decreeing a claim while exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 impermissible: SC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"November 17, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the Punjab and Haryana High Court not only set aside the judgment of the District Judge rejecting the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, but also awarded the claim of the respondents, together with interest, the bench of Dr.\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":336390,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/02\/arbitration-law-roundup-quick-recap-top-arbitration-cases-november-2024-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":1},"title":"Arbitration Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top arbitration cases from November 2024","author":"Editor","date":"December 2, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Top arbitration cases on unilateral appointment, seat of arbitration, limitation period, scope of judicial scrutiny and more.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Arbitration Law Roundup November","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Arbitration-Law-Roundup-November.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Arbitration-Law-Roundup-November.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Arbitration-Law-Roundup-November.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Arbitration-Law-Roundup-November.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":319872,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/04\/10\/supreme-court-allows-dmrc-curative-petition-arbitral-award-damepl\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":2},"title":"Supreme Court allows DMRC\u2019s Curative Petition against arbitral award in favour of Delhi Airport Metro Express","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 10, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court has applied the standard of a \u2018grave miscarriage of justice\u2019 in the exceptional circumstances of this case where the process of arbitration has been perverted by the arbitral tribunal to provide an undeserved windfall to DAMEPL.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"DMRC\u2019s Curative Petition","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/DMRCs-Curative-Petition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/DMRCs-Curative-Petition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/DMRCs-Curative-Petition.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/DMRCs-Curative-Petition.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":338682,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/08\/arbitration-2024-landmark-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":3},"title":"Arbitration in 2024: Landmark Rulings and Key Takeaways","author":"Editor","date":"January 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"From the High Court\u2019s clarification of the definition of \"court\" under the Arbitration Act to the Supreme Court\u2019s recommendation for Parliament to introduce an amendment defining a specific limitation period for the appointment of arbitrators, several key rulings have shaped the arbitration landscape. This piece highlights the notable arbitration cases\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Arbitration Roundup 2024","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Arbitration-Roundup-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Arbitration-Roundup-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Arbitration-Roundup-2024.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Arbitration-Roundup-2024.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":370975,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/26\/del-hc-civil-suit-cannot-nullify-arbitral-award\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":4},"title":"Civil suit cannot vitiate arbitral awards on grounds of fraud: Delhi High Court upholds Single Judge’s order","author":"Prarthana Gupta","date":"December 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Once arbitral award attains finality up to the Supreme Court, separate civil suit challenging underlying transaction on grounds of fraud is barred by Section 5 of the Arbitration Act and principles of finality.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"civil suit cannot nullify arbitral award","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/civil-suit-cannot-nullify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/civil-suit-cannot-nullify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/civil-suit-cannot-nullify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/civil-suit-cannot-nullify-arbitral-award.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291180,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/03\/supreme-court-know-thy-judge-ps-narasimha-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":327979,"position":5},"title":"Know Thy Judge | Supreme Court of India: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice P.S. Narasimha whose tenure as an advocate is full of landmark cases, became the 9th advocate to be directly elevated from the Bar to the Supreme Court judgeship.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice p.s. narasimha","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-p.s.-narasimha.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-p.s.-narasimha.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-p.s.-narasimha.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-p.s.-narasimha.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327979","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\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=327979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327979\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/327985"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=327979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=327979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=327979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}