Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(vi) When an award is contrary to the interest of India, or against justice or morality, in the sense that it shocks the conscience of the Court."

35. As regards the instant case relating to issues which emerged between the appellant and the respondents, but the reasons recorded by the Challenging Court which has initiated proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act to interfere the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal, on a perusal of the impugned judgment and decree rendered by the court below relating to the aforesaid appeal matters, but the common award has been rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal by formulating issues which are indicated in detail in the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal. But the Court, while considering the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal and keeping in view Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, referred to a judgment in the case of MMTC Ltd. Vs. Vedanta Ltd. ((2019) 4 SCC 163) as regards interference with an order made under Section 34 as per Section 37 of the Arbitration Act is concerned, it cannot be disputed that such interference under Section 37 cannot travel behind the restriction laid down under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. In order words, the Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award and must only ascertain with the exercise of powers by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provisions. Thus, it is evident that in case an arbitral award has been challenged before the Challenging Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, and by the Court in an appeal under Section 37, this Court must be extremely cautious and also slow to disturb any such findings.

36. But in the instant case, and so also issues emerged between the appellant and the respondent respectively, in the above five appeals but the Court has ultimately allowed the appeal of the claimant / appellant by setting aside the judgment rendered by the Challenging Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act with a direction to expeditiously persuade the matters in between the appellant and the respondent relating to the claim which has been sought and more so, the claims were rejected which is indicated in detail in the award rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal.

39. Before dwelling into the topic, it would be beneficial to briefly look into the scheme of Section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act. As per Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, recourse to a court (Civil Court or High Court having original jurisdiction) may be made for setting aside an arbitral award only on certain grounds. Keeping in view the power to modify an arbitral award, it is the language used in Section 34 sub-clause (2)(b) that has tempted the courts to go beyond the mandate of 'setting aside' an award venture into correcting errors that, at times, include modification of an award to secure the ends of justice. Under what circumstances can a court interfere with an arbitral award has been comprehensively covered in the case of ONGC Ltd. Vs. SAW PIPES LTD ((2003) 5 SCC 705)).

40. Section 37, on the other hand, inter-alia, provides for an appeal against an order passed under Section 34. The jurisdiction of appellate courts under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act has been discussed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MMTC LTD. Vs. VEDANTA LTD ((2019) 4 SCC 163)) and in the case of UHL POWER COMPANY LTD. Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ((2022) 4 SCC 116)) wherein it was held that interference under Section 37 cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34, and that an independent assessment of the merits of the award is not permitted. Thus, a limited scope of interference in arbitral awards has been given to the Courts under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act.