Allowing Modification of Arbitral Award by Court — A Retrograde Step?
by Dr G.B. Reddy* and Dr S.B. Md. Irfan Ali Abbas**
arbitral award
Detailed Breakdown of Gujarat High Court Ruling on Delay in curing registry defects under Section 34 and its impact on arbitration applications
The Court noted that the registry did not follow the procedure prescribed in the GHC Rules for movement of the papers from the registry to the competent Court, thus there was no occasion for consideration by the Court concerned as to whether the respondents were entitled to condonation of delay in removal of office objections.
Supreme Court May 2025: Latest Stories & Judgments on New Appointments; Arbitral Award; Maternity leave; SCBA elections; 3-year Legal Practice for Judiciary; and more
Stay informed with the latest Supreme Court judgments from May 2025, covering critical topics such as modifications to arbitral awards, maternity leave policies, SCBA elections, and the right to digital access. This comprehensive roundup also highlights the appointments and transfers by the Supreme Court. Explore the key rulings shaping the legal landscape.
Objections under S. 47 CPC not allowed in enforcement proceedings of arbitral award, allowing such objection undermines S.34 A&C Act: Delhi HC
“The provisions of CPC are only applicable to the extent of ‘enforcement’ of an award which are reflected in Order 21 of CPC. The legislature did not intend to permit a challenge an award during enforcement proceedings again on merits as it would be contrary to the objectives of the A&C Act which aims to ensure finality and limited judicial interference.”
Breakdown of SC’s 4:1 Verdict on Court’s limited power to modify Arbitral Awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
The present controversy arose because the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not expressly empower courts to modify or vary an arbitral award, and Section 34 of the 1996 Act only confers upon courts the power to set aside an award.
Courts have limited power to modify arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act: Supreme Court by 4:1 majority
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides the legal framework for challenging an arbitral award before a court, while Section 37 governs appeals against specific orders passed under the Act, including those made under Section 34.
Madras HC clears attachment on late actor Sivaji Ganesan’s property amid arbitral award execution against grandson
If the intention of the legislature had been to require the recording of oral evidence for adjudicating every application filed under Order 21, Rule 58 CPC, such a requirement would have been explicitly stipulated within the provision itself.
‘Frequent interference with arbitral awards would defeat purpose of 1996 Act’; SC reiterates narrow scope of appellate court’s power under S. 37
“Section 37 of the 1996 Act grants narrower scope to the appellate court to review the findings in an arbitral award if it has been upheld or substantially upheld under Section 34.”
Limitation for filing S. 17 application under Arbitration Act, 1940 begins from awareness of award’s availability, not receipt of copy: Supreme Court reaffirms
Supreme Court said that allowing a party, already aware of the award, to delay proceedings by insisting on procedural formalities would frustrate the expeditious resolution of disputes, undermining the very purpose of the Arbitration Act.
Delhi Court orders conditional stay on attachment of Bikaner House; Directs payment of decretal amount in terms of Arbitral Award
The Court had ordered the attachment of the Bikaner House to enforce payment since neither did the Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan comply with the court order to file an affidavit of assets nor did it pay the petitioner per the arbitral award.
Patiala House Court orders attachment of Bikaner House to enforce payment under an arbitral award
The Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan failed to comply with court order to file an affidavit of assets despite being given multiple opportunities and failed to pay the petitioner in accordance with the arbitral award.
Arbitration Act 1996 a self-contained code which does not distinguish between government and private entities: SC
The Court said that governmental entities must be treated in a similar fashion to private parties insofar as proceedings under the Arbitration Act are concerned, except where otherwise indicated by law.
Supreme Court sets aside Calcutta HC judgment denying extension of arbitration mandate beyond deadline for making an award; Directs fresh adjudication of petition
In the Judgment dated 12-09-2024, Supreme Court had held that an application for extension of time for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A (4) read with Section 29A (5) is maintainable even after the expiry of the twelve-month or the extended six-month period. The court, while adjudicating such extension applications will be guided by the principle of sufficient cause.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act | Appellate power of Section 37 is limited within the domain of Section 34: Supreme Court
“Merely for the reason that the view of the Appellate Court is a better view than the one taken by the arbitral tribunal, is no ground to set aside the award”.
‘Statutory right created in favour of party to assail decree cannot be taken away by S.14 of IBC’; Delhi Court sets aside Arbitral award in favour of Educomp Solutions Ltd.
‘The autonomy conferred on the parties is not unbridled and appointment of the Arbitrator has to meet the prerequisite of his neutrality and impartiality which are the bedrock on which the foundation of arbitration rests.’
Explained | Supreme Court decision on enforcement of Arbitral Award expressed in foreign currency
To resolve the questions arising and considering the uncertainties regarding time-lapse between the date of the award and its enforceability and the ever-fluctuating exchange rates, the Court formulated twin principles.
Application for extension of time for passing arbitral award under Section 29A of Arbitration Act is maintainable even after 18-month deadline for making of award: SC
“Section 29A intends to ensure the timely completion of arbitral proceedings while allowing Courts the flexibility to grant extensions when warranted. Prescribing a limitation period, unless clearly stated in words or necessary, should not be accepted. Bar by limitation has penal and fatal consequences.”
Madras High Court waives Swiss Garnier’s pre-deposit contemplated under S. 19 of MSMED Act for setting aside an award
The statutory authority under the MSMED Act would only have the jurisdiction to entertain a dispute when the supplier had been registered as a Micro or Small enterprise under the MSMED Act at that relevant point of time.
Impleading International Non-Signatories to a Domestic Arbitration: Analysing the Practical Implications
by Prashant Pakhiddey* and Manav Gill**
Top cases on Arbitration Law from July to August 2024
A quick recap of the latest rulings on Arbitration Law by the High Courts.