Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.29 seconds)Sanshin Chemicals Industry vs Orientals Carbons And Chemicals Ltd. ... on 16 February, 2001
7. Chapter 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
provides for a recourse against arbitration award by way of an
application which can be made by either parties u/s 34 of the
Act. The statute provides that on an application of either
parties, an arbitration award including an interim award can
be challenged and set aside. Reliance placed on AIR 2001 SC
1219 Sanshin Chemical Industry Vs. Oriental Carbon &
Chemicals. However, the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of
judgment has always held that section 34 does not provide
for an appeal against the arbitration award but provides for a
limited remedy to the court whereby which the court can
review and set aside the arbitral award only on the ground
specified under subsection (2) and subsection (3) of the
Act. It has been held in (2000) 3 Arb.
Laxmi Mathur vs The Chief General Manager, Mtnl, Mumbai on 17 April, 2000
LR 684 (Bombay) titled
Laxmi Mathur Vs. CGM MTNL that erstwhile Arbitration
CS No.192/11/05 MTNL Vs. Vaishali Enterprises 8/15
9
Act, 1940 provides for a wider scope against an Arbitration
Award, but a remedy against section 34 of the Arbitration
award under the 1996 Act, is available on limited grounds as
provided in the statute itself. It is further a settled
preposition of law that challenge to arbitral award is not to
the decision but limited only to the decision making process.
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals ... vs Eastern Engineering Enterprises & Anr on 20 September, 1999
Ld. Counsel for petitioner has
further relied upon the pronouncement of law laid down in
1991 (9) SCC 283 titled Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals
Ltd. Vs. Eastern Engineering Enterprises thereby stating
that if the arbitrator ignore the specific terms and conditions
of the contract, it is the question of jurisdictional error which
could be corrected by the Court in exercise of its power u/s
34 of the Act,. Though, there is no dispute about the
preposition of law in the aforesaid judgment that Ld.
Arbitrator is strictly bound by terms and conditions as
stipulated in the original agreement, and being a creature of
the agreement can not go beyond the terms of the agreement
or reference, he has to answer, it may however be seen that
main question before this court is that once the agreement
has expired the work undertaken during the extended period
by the respondent was not governed by the terms and
conditions of the original contract. This arguments of the
petitioner is fallacious without any basis and contrary to the
records.
Union Of India (Uoi) vs Hakam Chand & Co. on 29 August, 2002
Reliance placed on 2002 (65) DRJ 400 titled Union
of India Vs. Hakam Chand & Co. Thus, this court cannot
and should not sit over a evaluation arrived by the Ld.
CS No.192/11/05 MTNL Vs. Vaishali Enterprises 14/15
15
Arbitrator unless the award suffer from bias, incapacity, non
representation and any such irregularity or the arbitrator
has failed to follow the Principles of Natural Justice. This
court finds no such irregularity or illegality in the arbitral
process carried out by Ld. Arbitrator in arriving on his
findings of the award dated 01.03.2005. Resultantly, the
petitioner has failed to make out a case calling for an
interference for setting aside the award dated 01.03.2005 in
exercise of this court's power u/s 34 of the Act. The objection
petition is accordingly dismissed. Arbitration record be sent
back to Ld. Arbitrator with the copy of this order. Records
of this court be consigned to Record Room after due
completion.
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Golkonda Engg. Enterprises Limited vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited on 6 April, 2005
1. By way of present judgment, I shall conscientiously
adjudicate upon the petition under Section 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside the
arbitral award dated 01/03/2005 (hereinafter called the
CS No.192/11/05 MTNL Vs. Vaishali Enterprises 1/15
2
"impugned Award") as passed by Shri A.K. Nagar, Sole
Arbitrator, Chief Engineer (C) CTO Project, Bharat Sanchar
Nigam Ltd., in case No. ARB/AKN/24/2004 titled M/s Vaishali
Enterprises Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
1