{"id":354442,"date":"2025-07-24T16:00:03","date_gmt":"2025-07-24T10:30:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=354442"},"modified":"2025-07-28T11:39:20","modified_gmt":"2025-07-28T06:09:20","slug":"ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Orissa High Court:<\/span> The present appeal was filed by the Appellant-Contractor under Section 37<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (the \u20181996 Act\u2019) challenging the partial modification of an award by the District Judge, who had reduced one claim and set aside two others for lack of evidence. The State also filed a cross-appeal. A Single Judge Bench of Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J., dismissed both appeals, holding that the lower court\u2019s interference was limited to portions of the award that suffered from patent illegality due to lack of evidentiary support. The Court concluded that such targeted intervention was within the permissible scope of judicial review under Section 34<\/a> of the 1996 Act<\/a> and affirmed the modified award.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The contract was awarded to the appellant under World Bank-assisted Package No. RGJM-II for repair and reconstruction of cyclone-damaged roads in Ganjam District from RD 0.000 km to 16.300 km (Dhunkapada\u2014Kendubadi\u2014Mandara\u2014 Nachunibadi). The agreement valued at Rs 2,17,38,992, was executed on 3-12-2002 with original completion period ending on 2-3-2004. Due to delays in site demarcation, borrow area identification, and water supply, the contractor sought extension until 31-12-2004. Though internally recommended up to 2-9-2004, the extension was never formally communicated. Instead, the contract was retrospectively terminated with effect from 2-9-2004, via letter dated 7-2-2005. The appellant challenged this termination on grounds that final measurements were not taken in his presence and that the 7th RA bill was wrongly treated as final, despite ongoing work beyond December 2004.<\/p>\n

Pursuant to invocation of arbitration, a Sole Arbitrator was appointed by this Court under Section 11<\/a> of the 1996 Act<\/a>. The appellant submitted 16 claims, and the State filed a counterclaim of Rs 14,78,595 alleging overpayments. The Arbitrator passed an award dated 31-1-2010, granting Rs 1,48,60,262 under various heads. The award held that the termination was illegal, and thus there was no final bill in compliance with OPWD Code. The Arbitrator partly allowed 11 claims and rejected the counterclaim.<\/p>\n

The State challenged that award under Section 34<\/a> of the 1996 Act<\/a>, on grounds of arbitrariness, excessive computation, and absence of contractual provisions for certain heads. The District Judge partly allowed the challenge, reducing Claim 1 to Rs 38,65,619 and setting aside Claims 4 and 6, while upholding rest of the award. The appellant preferred an appeal against this partial setting aside. As a result the State cross appealed.<\/p>\n

The certified copy of the judgment was received on 1-12-2015 and the appeal was filed on 29-2-2016 after a delay of 36 days, which was sought to be condoned as procedural.<\/p>\n

The appellant alleged that the District Judge acted in clear excess of jurisdiction under Section 34 of the 1996 by venturing into the merits of the disputes and re-evaluating evidence while setting aside Claims 4 and 6 of the awards. It was argued that the reduction of Claim 1 was not supported by any findings that the Arbitrator\u2019s view was untenable. With respect to Claim 4 i.e. Rs 10,00,000, for compensation towards borrow earth from private land, it was asserted that the State did not dispute the need to borrow earth or failed to provide evidence that government land was provided. Similarly, claim 6 for Rs 29,43,821 was based on delays. The Arbitrator relied on appellant\u2019s letters on extended work and costs, unrebutted by the State. The termination was found illegal due to retrospective effect, lack of extension communication, and no final measurement in claimant\u2019s presence. Yet, rejecting related claims undermined this conclusion and was legally inconsistent.<\/p>\n

The State argued that there was no direct evidence supporting the awarded sum. Regarding Claim 1, the department contended that only Rs 12,46,887 was payable after the 6th RA bill and the Arbitrator without a verified assessment of the quantity of work executed, erroneously awarded Rs 41,05,445. The District Judge rightly corrected this to Rs 38,65,619, noting the absence of credible material substantiating actual work beyond what had already been paid. As for Claim 4 (compensation to private landowners) and Claim 6 (compensation for prolonged establishment), there were no documentary or oral evidence to support the same.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n

The Court dismissed the appellants argument of jurisdictional overreach by the District Judge, holding that Section 34<\/a> of the 1996 Act<\/a> permitted the Court to excise patently illegal portions of an award even without granular item-by-item objections, provided that broad ground was raised and both parties had opportunity to address it.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that the intervention made by the District Judge was a targeted intervention to uphold the integrity of the award by removing indefensible parts. The Court further highlighted that the exercise undertaken by the District Judge was in line with the statutory mandate, as it was neither a roving inquiry into the merits, nor a substitution of the Court\u2019s view for the Arbitrator\u2019s on contested evidence.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that nullifying Claim 4 was justified as it was unproved and speculative, making the award illegal. Further, deletion of Claim 6 was also affirmed due to lack of quantifiable data since granting it would be a bonus for delay without proof. The Court also noted that slight reduction in Claim 1 to Rs 38,65,619 was based on undisputed measurements and removed an excess component without proof, upheld as a correction, not reappreciation. The Court dismissed both appeals and affirmed the District Judge\u2019s judgment dated 16-10-2015, upholding the modified arbitral award. The Court further confirmed that the appellant was entitled to \u00e2\u201a\u00b91,06,76,616 along with the interest awarded by the Arbitrator.<\/p>\n

[Mahendra Swain v. State of Orissa, 2025 SCC OnLine Ori 2788<\/a>, decided on 18-7-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

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

For the Appellant:<\/span> Pami Rath, Sr. Adv. along with S. Mohanty, Adv.<\/p>\n

For the Respondents:<\/span> P.P. Behera, ASC.<\/p>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

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

“The scope of Section 34 review, though narrow, does permit the court to excise patently illegal portions of an award, even if a granular item-by-item objection was not pleaded, so long as the broad ground was raised and both parties had opportunity to address.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":354445,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[82829,38727,66061,81634,37146,32304,85909,31135,85910],"class_list":["post-354442","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitral-award-modification","tag-judicial-intervention","tag-justice-dr-s-k-panigrahi","tag-modification-of-arbitral-awards","tag-orissa-high-court","tag-section-34-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-section-37-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996","tag-sole-arbitrator","tag-targeted-intervention"],"yoast_head":"\nOrissa HC on scope of judicial intervention under Arbitration Act | SCC Time<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.\" \/>\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\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-07-24T10:30:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-07-28T06:09:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-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=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996\" \/>\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=\"5 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\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/\",\"name\":\"Orissa HC on scope of judicial intervention under Arbitration Act | SCC Time\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-07-24T10:30:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-07-28T06:09:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Scope of Judicial Intervention under Arbitration Act\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996\"}]},{\"@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":"Orissa HC on scope of judicial intervention under Arbitration Act | SCC Time","description":"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.","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\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996","og_description":"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-07-24T10:30:03+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-07-28T06:09:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","name":"Orissa HC on scope of judicial intervention under Arbitration Act | SCC Time","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp","datePublished":"2025-07-24T10:30:03+00:00","dateModified":"2025-07-28T06:09:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Orissa High Court upheld District Judge's partial setting aside of an arbitral award, finding that judicial interference was valid where claims lacked supporting evidence.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Scope of Judicial Intervention under Arbitration Act"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996"}]},{"@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\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":354442,"position":0},"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":362407,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/03\/rajasthan-high-court-appellate-power-under-section-37-arbitration-appeal-no-arbitration-clause-limitation\/","url_meta":{"origin":354442,"position":1},"title":"Rajasthan High Court: Appellate power under Section 37 confined to domain of Section 34 of Arbitration Act","author":"Editor","date":"October 3, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe scope of the intervention of the court in arbitral matters is virtually prohibited, if not absolutely barred.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Appellate power under Section 37","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Appellate-power-under-Section-37.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Appellate-power-under-Section-37.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Appellate-power-under-Section-37.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Appellate-power-under-Section-37.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":346868,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/30\/supreme-court-limited-arbitral-award-modification\/","url_meta":{"origin":354442,"position":2},"title":"Courts have limited power to modify arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act: Supreme Court by 4:1 majority","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 30, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides the legal framework for challenging an arbitral award before a court, while Section 37 governs appeals against specific orders passed under the Act, including those made under Section 34.","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Modify arbitral awards","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Modify-arbitral-awards.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Modify-arbitral-awards.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Modify-arbitral-awards.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Modify-arbitral-awards.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":335603,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/20\/awards-rendered-by-msme-council-only-be-challenged-under-section-34-arbitration-act-rissa-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":354442,"position":3},"title":"Awards rendered by MSME Council can be challenged under Section 34 of A&C Act and not under Art. 226: Orissa High Court","author":"Editor","date":"November 20, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In the matter at hand, the appellant contended that the Council\u2019s award ought to have been interfered with under Article 226\/227 of the Constitution, as there was no conciliation in accordance with the procedure prescribed, a condition precedent for initiation of arbitration proceeding under Section 18 (3) of the MSMED\u2026","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":351702,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/27\/allowing-modification-of-arbitral-award-by-court-a-retrograde-step\/","url_meta":{"origin":354442,"position":4},"title":"Allowing Modification of Arbitral Award by Court \u2014 A Retrograde Step?","author":"Editor","date":"June 27, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Dr G.B. Reddy* and Dr S.B. Md. Irfan Ali Abbas**","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":"Modification of Arbitral Award","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Modification-of-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\/06\/Modification-of-Arbitral-Award.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Modification-of-Arbitral-Award.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Modification-of-Arbitral-Award.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":363311,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/10\/interplay-between-sections-33-34-arbitration-act-experts-corner\/","url_meta":{"origin":354442,"position":5},"title":"When Does the Clock Start Ticking? The Interplay Between Sections 33 and 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996","author":"Editor","date":"October 10, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Arush Khanna* and Gurdev Singh Tung**","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Sections 33 and 34 Arbitration Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Sections-33-and-34-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Sections-33-and-34-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Sections-33-and-34-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Sections-33-and-34-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/354442","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=354442"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/354442\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/354445"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=354442"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=354442"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=354442"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}