Conduct Arbitral Proceedings- New submission/evidence/argument at final stage

Court cannot re-examine the evidence and reasonableness of the reasons given by Arbitrator since, the parties have themselves selected the forum then such forum must be conceded with the power of appraisement of evidence – Union of India Vs. Besco Ltd. (Wagon Division) – Delhi High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that:
(i) It is settled law that the ground of Patent illegality gives way to setting aside an Arbitral Award with a very minimal scope of intervention. A party cannot simply raise an objection on the ground of patent illegality if the Award is against them.
(ii) The reasoning of learned Sole Arbitrator is logical and all the material and evidence were taken note of by Learned Sole Arbitrator and this Court cannot substitute its own evaluation of conclusion of law or fact to conclude other than that of learned Sole Arbitrator.
(iii) As per the judgment in Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. v. State of Goa (2023) ibclaw.in 66 SC, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has settled the law on the limited grounds of challenge of Section 34 of the Act, 1996. The Court cannot re-examine the evidence and reasonableness of the reasons given by the Arbitrator since, the parties have themselves selected the forum then such forum must be conceded with the power of appraisement of evidence. The Arbitrator is the master of facts and law and has the jurisdiction and authority to decide the issue at hand and if the Tribunal has reached a conclusion after considering all the material on record.

Court cannot re-examine the evidence and reasonableness of the reasons given by Arbitrator since, the parties have themselves selected the forum then such forum must be conceded with the power of appraisement of evidence – Union of India Vs. Besco Ltd. (Wagon Division) – Delhi High Court Read Post »

The Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not sit as a Court of Appeal against the findings of Arbitral Tribunal – ARG Outlier Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. HT Media Ltd. – Delhi High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that it is settled law that the Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Act does not sit as a Court of Appeal against the findings of the learned Arbitral Tribunal. Its jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Act is rather limited and even a contravention of a statute, that is not linked to a public policy or public interest, cannot be a ground for setting aside an Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Act. Therefore, even assuming that the learned Sole Arbitrator made a mistake in the interpretation of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, in my view, it cannot be a ground to interfere with the Arbitral Award in the exercise of the limited jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Act.

The Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not sit as a Court of Appeal against the findings of Arbitral Tribunal – ARG Outlier Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs. HT Media Ltd. – Delhi High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top