Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.40 seconds)

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:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 335 - Full Document

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.
Supreme Court of India Cites 65 - Cited by 952 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 Next