Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.40 seconds)The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Delhi Development Authority vs M/S Harbans Singh & Sons on 21 July, 2008
53. The Delhi High Court in Delhi Development Authority vs.
Harbans Singh & Sons, 2008(105) DRJ 60 (DB), has observed that the
Arbitrator is not required to give detailed Judgment or detailed reasons.
Courts are not required to go into the reasonableness of the reasons or
sufficiency of the reasons.
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals ... vs Eastern Engineering Enterprises & Anr on 20 September, 1999
51. That apart the scope of interference under Section 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is limited. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd., vs. Eastern
Engineering Enterprises and Another, (1999) 9 SCC 283, has explained
the scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996.
Relevant portion of the said decision reads as under:-
Government Of Kerala vs Som Datt Builders Ltd. on 22 October, 2002
31. The Judgment in Government of Kerala vs. Som Datt Builders
Ltd., 2002 SCC Online Ker 134, was referred to wherein it was held that
once the Arbitral Tribunal has examined the facts and given its reasons,
recourse to the Court under Section 34 to examine the reasonableness of the
reasons given by the Arbitrator in making his award is not permissible as the
Arbitral Tribunal is the sole Judge of the quality and quantity of the evidence
before it.
Ssangyong Engineering And ... vs National Highways Authority Of ... on 8 May, 2019
56. The Honourable Supreme Court in Ssangyong Engineering
and Construction Co Ltd versus National Highway Authority of
India, (2019) 15 SCC 131 has held that an award can be set aside on the
ground of patent illegality under section 34 (2-A) of the Arbitration And
Conciliation Act, 1996 only where the illegality in the award goes to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
27/30
O.P.No.94 of 2021
root of the matter. It further held that erroneous application of law by
an Arbitral Tribunal or the reappreciation of evidence by the court
under section 34 (2-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is
not available.
Section 30 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Patel Engineering Co. Ltd vs B.T. Patil And Sons Belgaum ... on 8 January, 2016
vii)Patel Engineering Co., Ltd., vs.
B.T.Patil & Sons Belgaum
(Construction) Pvt.Ltd. and Ors.,
Arb.P.Nos.891 & 893 of 2010 dated
08.01.2016
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M/S Dyna Technologies Pvt.Ltd. vs M/S Crompton Greaves Ltd. on 18 December, 2019
23. Specifically, a reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Dyna Technologies Pvt.Ltd., vs. Crompton Greaves
Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1656 which reads as under : -
Mcdermott International Inc vs Burn Standard Co. Ltd. & Ors on 12 May, 2006
25. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has also placed
reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in McDermott
International Inc. vs. Burn Standard Co.Ltd.and Ors., (2006) 11 SCC