Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.22 seconds)Section 39 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
State Of Rajasthan & Anr vs M/S. Ferro Concrete Construction ... on 22 April, 2009
11. The present appeal is under Section 39 of the old Act. The
principles for any interference in the awards arising there-under
were reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan
& Anr. vs. Ferro Concrete Construction Pvt. Ltd., (2009) 12
SCC 1 (in paras 20 and 21), as under :
State Of Rahjasthan vs Puti Construction Co. Ltd on 16 September, 1994
21. This Court explained the principles relating to
interference with awards under the 1940 Act in State
of Rajasthan v. Puri Construction Co. Ltd. [(1994) 6
SCC 485] thus: (SCC pp. 502-03, para 31)
"31. ... Similarly, an award rendered by an
arbitrator is open to challenge within the
parameters of several provisions of the
Arbitration Act. Since the arbitrator is a
Judge by choice of the parties, and more
often than not, a person with little or no legal
background, the adjudication of disputes by
an arbitration by way of an award can be
FAO(OS) 204/2005 Page 7 of 15
challenged only within the limited scope of
several provisions of the Arbitration Act and
the legislature in its wisdom has limited the
scope and ambit of challenge to an award in
the Arbitration Act. Over the decades,
judicial decisions have indicated the
parameters of such challenge consistent with
the provisions of the Arbitration Act. By and
large the courts have disfavoured
interference with arbitration award on
account of error of law and fact on the score
of misappreciation and misreading of the
materials on record and have shown definite
inclination to preserve the award as far as
possible. As reference to arbitration of
disputes in commercial and other
transactions involving substantial amount
has increased in recent times, the courts
were impelled to have fresh look on the ambit
of challenge to an award by the arbitrator so
that the award does not get undesirable
immunity. In recent times, error in law and
fact in basing an award has not been given
the wide immunity as enjoyed earlier, by
expanding the import and implication of
'legal misconduct' of an arbitrator so that
award by the arbitrator does not perpetrate
gross miscarriage of justice and the same is
not reduced to mockery of a fair decision of
the lis between the parties to arbitration.
Precisely for the aforesaid reasons, the
erroneous application of law constituting the
very basis of the award and improper and
incorrect findings of fact, which without
closer and intrinsic scrutiny, are
demonstrable on the face of the materials on
record, have been held, very rightly, as legal
misconduct rendering the award as invalid. It
FAO(OS) 204/2005 Page 8 of 15
is necessary, however, to put a note of
caution that in the anxiety to render justice to
the party to arbitration, the court should not
reappraise the evidence intrinsically with a
close scrutiny for finding out that the
conclusion drawn from some facts, by the
arbitrator is, according to the understanding
of the court, erroneous. Such exercise of
power which can be exercised by an
appellate court with power to reverse the
finding of fact, is alien to the scope and
ambit of challenge of an award under the
Arbitration Act. Where the error of finding of
facts having a bearing on the award is patent
and is easily demonstrable without the
necessity of carefully weighing the various
possible viewpoints, the interference with
award based on erroneous finding of fact is
permissible. Similarly, if an award is based
by applying a principle of law which is
patently erroneous, and but for such
erroneous application of legal principle, the
award could not have been made, such
award is liable to be set aside by holding that
there has been a legal misconduct on the part
of the arbitrator. In ultimate analysis, it is a
question of delicate balancing between the
permissible limit of error of law and fact and
patently erroneous finding easily
demonstrable from the materials on record
and application of principle of law forming
the basis of the award which is patently
erroneous."
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
1