Hoogly River Bridges Commissioners vs Mbl Infrastructure Ltd on 3 November, 2025
In Consolidated Consortium Construction Ltd. vs. Software Technology Parks of
India (2025) 7 SCC 757, it has been held as follows:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 51 (3.01 seconds)Documents citing
Consolidated Construction Consortium ... vs Software Technology Parks Of India on 25 September, 2023
Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam ... vs Parsa Kente Collieries Limited on 23 May, 2025
The Supreme Court in Consolidated Construction
Consortium Limited versus Software Technology Parks
of India (supra) held:
India Media Services Private Limited vs Sbpl Infrastructure Limited on 24 September, 2025
(i) Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act is not appellate in nature; an award may be set aside
only on the limited grounds in Section 34(2)/ (2A). Courts cannot
interfere merely because the award is illegal or erroneous in law if that
requires reappraisal of evidence, and where two views are possible, the
arbitrator's view must ordinarily prevail. Paragraph 23 and 24 are as
under: -
India Media Services Private Limited vs Sbpl Infrastructure Limited on 24 September, 2025
(i) Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act is not appellate in nature; an award may be set aside
only on the limited grounds in Section 34(2)/ (2A). Courts cannot
interfere merely because the award is illegal or erroneous in law if that
requires reappraisal of evidence, and where two views are possible, the
arbitrator's view must ordinarily prevail. Paragraph 23 and 24 are as
under: -
India Media Services Private Limited vs Sbpl Infrastructure Limited on 24 September, 2025
(i) Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act is not appellate in nature; an award may be set aside
only on the limited grounds in Section 34(2)/ (2A). Courts cannot
interfere merely because the award is illegal or erroneous in law if that
requires reappraisal of evidence, and where two views are possible, the
arbitrator's view must ordinarily prevail. Paragraph 23 and 24 are as
under: -
India Media Services Private Limited vs Sbpl Infrastructure Limited on 24 September, 2025
(i) Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act is not appellate in nature; an award may be set aside
only on the limited grounds in Section 34(2)/ (2A). Courts cannot
interfere merely because the award is illegal or erroneous in law if that
requires reappraisal of evidence, and where two views are possible, the
arbitrator's view must ordinarily prevail. Paragraph 23 and 24 are as
under: -
India Media Services Private Limited vs Sbpl Infrastructure Limited on 24 September, 2025
(i) Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act is not appellate in nature; an award may be set aside
only on the limited grounds in Section 34(2)/ (2A). Courts cannot
interfere merely because the award is illegal or erroneous in law if that
requires reappraisal of evidence, and where two views are possible, the
arbitrator's view must ordinarily prevail. Paragraph 23 and 24 are as
under: -
National Council Of Education Research ... vs M/S Murli Industries Ltd on 10 October, 2025
32. The principles with regard to the limited scope of interference by a
Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act against the Arbitral Award
have been reiterated time and again by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court,
reliance is placed on Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited
v. Software Technology Parks of India, 2025 INSC 574 and more
particularly paragraph No. 23, which reads as under:-
Engineers India Limited & Anr vs Ms Shivhare Road Lines on 17 October, 2025
38. At the outset, it is important to take note of the extremely
circumscribed scope of the jurisdiction under Section 34 of the A&C Act.
The said aspect has been emphasised and reiterated by the Supreme Court in
a catena of judgments including Consolidated Constructions Consortium
Ltd vs. Software Technology Parks of India (2025) 7 SCC 757, wherein it
has been observed as under: -
Sunlight Project Pvt Ltd vs Delhi Development Authority on 11 November, 2025
33. The Court under Section 34 of the 1996 Act has very limited and
narrow scope of interference against an Arbitral Award and the same
has been reiterated time and again by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court,
reliance is placed on Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited
v. Software Technology Parks of India, 2025 INSC 574 and more
particularly paragraph No. 23, which reads as under:-