Any attempt to “modify an award” under Section 34 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 would amount to “crossing the Lakshman Rekha” | Arbitral proceedings are per se not comparable to judicial proceedings before the Court – S.V. Samudram Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr. – Supreme Court
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that:
(i) The position as to whether an arbitral award can be modified in the proceedings initiated under Sections 34/37 of the A&C Act is no longer res integra.
(ii) The Court categorically observed that any attempt to “modify an award” under Section 34 would amount to “crossing the Lakshman Rekha”.
(iii) It is a settled principle of law that arbitral proceedings are per se not comparable to judicial proceedings before the Court
(iv) It is also a settled principle of law that an award passed by a technical expert is not meant to be scrutinised in the same manner as is the one prepared by a legally trained mind
(v) Observation of the court, advisory in nature, for the contractor to have commenced the work for one part of the contract is unwarranted and uncalled for, in fact perverse.
(vi) For it is no business of the Court to consider the burden on the exchequer.
(vii) Accounting for the legal position, the court could have at best set aside the award and could not modify the same.
(viii) The Court under Section 37 had only three options:-
(a) Confirming the award of the Arbitrator;
(b) Setting aside the award as modified under Section 34; and
(c) Rejecting the application(s) under Section 34 and 37.
