Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 demand respect to the finality of the arbitral ruling – Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. M/s. Zillion Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi High Court
Hon’ble High Court held that the scope of interference under Section 37 of the Act, 1996 is extremely limited. Sections 34 and 37 demand respect to the finality of the arbitral ruling and the party autonomy in having chosen to get their issues resolved through alternate forum of arbitration which would be thwarted if the courts were to accept the challenge to the arbitral rulings on factual issues in a regular manner as reiterated in the recent decision of National Highway Authority of India vs. M. Hakeem (2021) ibclaw.in 203 SC. It was observed by the Apex Court that Section 34 has a different methodology and it cannot be considered as a typical Appellate Jurisdiction. The Award, being supported by reasons, does not call for any interference. The Court is not permitted to independently evaluate the merits of the Award, but must confine its authority to the parameters permitted under the statute as held in Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty. Ltd. vs. MMTC Ltd. (2020) ibclaw.in 169 SC.
