Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

Courts under Section 34 Cannot Modify Arbitral Awards: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on November 2, 2023, the High Court, comprising of Justices YASHWANT VARMA and DHARMESH SHARMA, emphasized the limited scope of interference with arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The case revolved around an appeal by the National Projects Constructions Corporation Ltd. (NPCC) against a judgment that partially set aside an arbitral award concerning liquidated damages. The appellant and respondent, M/S AAC India Pvt. Ltd., had entered into an agreement for the installation of a Fire Protection System. Due to project delays, the matter went into arbitration.

In its observation, the Court stated, “The jurisdiction under Section 34 is neither appellate nor revisional,” underscoring that an award can only be set aside on limited grounds specified in the Act. The Court further highlighted that there is no power vested in the Court to modify an award under Section 34.

The High Court also scrutinized the contractual clauses related to liquidated damages. It found that the learned ADJ had misconstrued evidence and correspondence between the parties. The Court observed, “The finding given by the learned ADJ that imposition of LD was only being negotiated upon is absolutely flawed.”

High Court set aside the order of the learned ADJ to the extent it struck down the award dated 29 August 2016 regarding payment of liquidated damages. The award passed by the Arbitrator was upheld in its entirety.

The ruling is expected to have significant implications for arbitration proceedings and the scope of judicial interference in such matters.

 Date of Decision: o2 November 2023

NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTIONS CORPORATION LTD. (NPCC) VS  M/S AAC INDIA PVT. LTD.   

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Del-02-Nov-23-NPCC-Vs-ACC-India.pdf"]

Latest Legal News