Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

34.

18. The same view has been followed in State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Toepfer International Asia PTE Ltd. MANU/DE/1480/2014 (DB), Delhi State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rama Construction Company MANU/DE/1518/2014 (DB), Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs. Fujitshu India Pvt. Ltd. MANU/DE/0459/2015 (DB) [SLP No. 21831/2015 preferred whereaginst was dismissed on 14th August, 2015], Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. Vs. Finolex Cables Ltd. MANU/DE/2818/2017 (DB), L.G. Electronics India (P) Ltd. Vs. Dinesh Kalra MANU/DE/1379/2018 (DB), M.L. Lakhanpal Vs. Darshan Lal MANU/DE/2159/2018 (DB), Airports Authority of India Vs. Sikka Associates MANU/DE/2988/2018 (DB), ADTV Communication Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vibha Goel MANU/DE/1688/2018 (DB), State Trading Corporation of India Vs. Helm Dungemittel Gmbh MANU/DE/2063/2018 (DB), NHAI Vs. BSC-RBM-Pati Joint Venture 2018 SCC OnLine Del 6780 (DB), V2 Retail Ltd. Vs. S.S. Enterprises MANU/DE/1365/2019 (DB), Union of India Vs. Chenab Construction Company (Regd.) MANU/DE/3355/2019 (DB), Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. MANU/DE/3356/2019 (DB), National Highways Authority of India Vs. PCL Suncon (JV) 2019 SCC OnLine Del 10933 (DB), National Highways Authority of India Vs. PNC- BEL (JV) 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9461 (DB) and MMTC Limited Vs. Karam Chand Thapar & Bros (Coal Sales) Ltd. 2019 SCC OnLine Del 7648 (DB) [SLP No. 9877/2019 preferred whereagainst was dismissed on 29th April, 2019]. Finally, the Supreme Court in MMTC Ltd. Vs. Vedanta Ltd. (2019) 4 SCC 163 has held that interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 and that the appellate Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision; it was further held that in case an arbitral award has been confirmed by the Court under Section 34 and by the Court in an appeal under Section 37, even the Supreme Court must be extremely cautious and slow to disturb such concurrent findings. Since then, other Division Benches of this Court in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Aksh Optifibre Ltd.