The contours of the proceedings under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 also is limited to the scope and the ambit of challenge under Section 34 – Gaursons Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aakash Engineers and Contractors – Allahabad High Court
Hon’ble Allahabad High Court held that:
A. Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was deliberately engrafted in a couched manner bearing in mind the fact that there should be limited intervention of Courts in arbitral proceedings especially after the proceedings have been concluded and the award has been pronounced by the arbitral tribunal.
B. The yardsticks and the parameters under which intervention by the courts of law in the proceedings against the award stands bracketed in Section 34 of the Act which obviously starts with caveat that the arbitral award may only be set aside by the Court if the party making the application establishes on the basis of the record of the arbitral tribunal:
(i) was under some incapacity;
(ii) the arbitral agreement is not valid under the law for the time being in force;
(iii) a party making the application was not given proper notice of appointment of arbitrator or he was unable to present his case;
(iv) the arbitral award deals with a dispute not contemplated or not falling within the terms of the submission of the arbitrator;
(v) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties unless such agreement was in conflict with the provisions;
(vi) the subject matter of dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under law for the time being in force;
(vii) the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India.