From the above decisions, the following principles
emerge:
(a) An award, which is
(i) contrary to substantive provisions of law; or
(ii) the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996; or
(iii) against the terms of the respective contract; or
(iv) patently illegal; or
(v) prejudicial to the rights of the parties;
is open to interference by the court Under Section
34(2) of the Act.
(b) The award could be set aside if it is contrary to:
(a) fundamental policy of Indian law; or
(b) the interest of India; or
(c) justice or morality.
(c) The award could also be set aside if it is so unfair
and unreasonable that it shocks the conscience of the
court.
(d) It is open to the court to consider whether the
award is against the specific terms of contract and if
so, interfere with it on the ground that it is patently
illegal and opposed to the public policy of India.
Print Page
emerge:
(a) An award, which is
(i) contrary to substantive provisions of law; or
(ii) the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996; or
(iii) against the terms of the respective contract; or
(iv) patently illegal; or
(v) prejudicial to the rights of the parties;
is open to interference by the court Under Section
34(2) of the Act.
(b) The award could be set aside if it is contrary to:
(a) fundamental policy of Indian law; or
(b) the interest of India; or
(c) justice or morality.
(c) The award could also be set aside if it is so unfair
and unreasonable that it shocks the conscience of the
court.
(d) It is open to the court to consider whether the
award is against the specific terms of contract and if
so, interfere with it on the ground that it is patently
illegal and opposed to the public policy of India.
Bombay High Court
Maharashtra State Electricity ... vs Vijay Electricals Ltd on 4 February, 2015
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka
Citation:2016(5) ALLMR 74
Read full judgment here: click here
No comments:
Post a Comment