Supreme Court Modifies Directive On Sanitary Napkins In Schools, Mandates Use Of Sustainable Biodegradable And Compostable Materials Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit | Courts Must Invoke Equitable Principles To Exempt E-Filing Delays Caused By System Failures: Supreme Court Section 47 & 48 BNSS | Substantial Compliance With Statutory Safeguards Regarding Grounds Of Arrest Sufficient To Sustain Custody: Allahabad High Court Order I Rule 10 CPC | Third Parties Claiming Independent Title Cannot Be Impleaded In Specific Performance Suits Against Plaintiff's Wish: Andhra Pradesh High Court Licensing Authority Cannot Refuse Orchestra Licence On Vague Grounds Of 'Law And Order' Without Objective Material: Bombay High Court Order Of Evacuation Under Sec 37A WB Fire Services Act Must Reflect Application Of Mind To Petitioner’s Reply: Calcutta High Court Suppression Of Criminal Antecedents | Employer Must Apply Mind To Nature Of Offence And Age Of Candidate Before Cancelling Candidature: Allahabad High Court Trial Court Cannot Pass Ex Parte Decree As If It Were Contested Merits Without Notice To Party Upon Counsel’s Withdrawal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suit For Partition Not Maintainable Without Seeking Relief Of Possession If Plaintiff Is Not In Physical Or Constructive Possession: Delhi High Court Section 482 CrPC | High Court Can Quash Matrimonial FIRs Based On Amicable Settlement To Prevent Abuse Of Process: Gujarat High Court Mere Acquittal In Criminal Case Does Not Establish Malicious Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reiterates Essential Ingredients Under Tort Law Revenue Records Do Not Confer Title; Authorities Must Record Registered Deeds Promptly To Prevent Fraudulent Transfers: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 24 CPC | Paramount Consideration In Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings Is Convenience Of Wife: Orissa High Court Section 318 BNS | FIR Quashed As Court Finds Criminal Prosecution Being Used To Settle A Purely Civil Commercial Dispute: J&K High Court Principles Of Res Judicata And Delay Bar State From Reopening Decades-Old Land Tribunal Orders: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Has Discretion To Refuse Summoning Of Defence Witnesses If Application Is Vexatious Or Aimed At Delay: Kerala High Court Co-Owner’s Exclusive Possession And Non-Participation In Profits For Decades Can Raise Presumption Of Ouster: Madras High Court Competition Commission Of India Has Jurisdiction To Probe Anti-Competitive Conduct In Liquor Trade Despite State Regulatory Framework: Madhya Pradesh High Court Plaintiff Cannot Seek Title Declaration Without Proving Ownership And Precise Identity Of Disputed Property: Punjab And Haryana High Court Settlement Deed Excluding Legal Heirs From Intestate Succession Cannot Override Statutory Inheritance Rights: Madras High Court

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