Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Sentence Cannot Be Reduced to Two Months for Four Life-Threatening Stab Wounds: Supreme Court Restores 3-Year RI in Attempt to Murder Case Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Substitute Proof: Apex Court Reaffirms Limits of Section 106 IEA Accused at the Time of the Statement Was Not in the Custody of the Police - Discovery Statement Held Inadmissible Under Section 27: Supreme Court Failure to Explain What Happened After ‘Last Seen Together’ Becomes an Additional Link: Supreme Court Strengthens Section 106 Evidence Act Doctrine Suicide in a Pact Is Conditional Upon Mutual Participation — Survivor’s Resolve Reinforces the Act: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Participation in Draw Does Not Cure Illegality: Supreme Court Rejects Estoppel in Arbitrary Flat Allotment Case Nepotism and Self-Aggrandizement Are Anathema to a Democratic System: Supreme Court Quashes Allotment of Super Deluxe Flats by Government Employees’ Welfare Society Liberty Is Not Absolute When It Becomes a Threat to Society: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Alleged ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Mastermind Magistrate’s Power Is Limited — Sessions Court May Yet Try the Case: Supreme Court Corrects High Court’s Misconception in ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Bail Order Dacoity Cannot Be Presumed, It Must Be Proved: Allahabad High Court Acquits Villagers After 43 Years, Citing ‘Glaring Lapses’ in Prosecution Case When the Judge Signs with the Prosecutor, Justice Is Already Compromised: MP High Court Quashes Tainted Medical College Enquiry Strict Rules Of Evidence Do Not Apply To Proceedings Before The Family Court: Kerala High Court Upholds Wife’s Claim For Gold And Money Commission Workers Cannot Claim Status of Civil Servants: Gujarat High Court Declines Regularization of Physically Challenged Case-Paper Operators Non-Wearing of Helmet Had a Direct Nexus with Fatal Head Injuries  : Madras High Court Upholds 25% Contributory Negligence for Helmet Violation Only a ‘Person Aggrieved’ Can Prosecute Defamation – Political Party Must Be Properly Represented: Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Rahul Gandhi

No Interference with the Arbitral Award Would be Warranted Unless the View is Patently Illegal or Perverse – Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment announced on 19th September 2023, the Delhi High Court has settled the ongoing litigation between the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and D S Toll Roads Pvt. Ltd. The Court has upheld the arbitral award dated 07.07.2016 and emphasized limited judicial interference with arbitration awards.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri presided over the matter filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The case revolved around a dispute related to the delay in the completion of a highway project in Tamil Nadu. D S Toll Roads Pvt. Ltd. had claimed various amounts as compensation for delays and additional costs incurred.

"The scope of interference under section 34 of the Act is limited. The arbitral tribunal is the final adjudicating authority in respect of the disputes between the parties, as well as the interpretation of the agreement between them," the judge noted in his observation. He added, "No interference with the arbitral award would be warranted unless the Court finds that the view is patently illegal or perverse."

The Court further clarified that sub-clauses 13.5.1 and 13.5.2, dealing with compensation for delays in handing over the site, were not applicable in this case. Instead, the court concluded that the computation of damages should be done according to sub-clause 31.2 of the Concession Agreement.

This decision has clarified the limits of judicial intervention in arbitration matters and will likely serve as a precedent in similar future disputes.

NHAI had challenged the arbitral award that granted various compensatory amounts to D S Toll Roads Pvt. Ltd. The contractor had raised six claims amounting to various figures, and the Arbitral Tribunal had awarded interest on these claims as well.

Legal experts are viewing the decision as a strong endorsement of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism, where courts are not to interfere unless absolutely necessary, according to the standards set by Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

In the words of the judge, "The Court is not meant to act as a court of first appeal, and cannot supplant its view over that of the arbitral tribunal."

The judgment has been received with great interest by the legal community and could have significant implications for arbitration proceedings in India going forward.

 Date of Decision: September 19, 2023

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA vs D S TOLL ROADS PVT. LTD.             

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/NHAI_Vs_D_S_Tolls_19_Sept_2023_DelHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News