An award can be set aside if it shocks the conscience of the court. (Bombay High Court)

     Update by Shruti Mishra

Jackie Kukubhai Shroff v. Ratnam Sudesh Iyer Court: Bombay High Court | Case Number: ARB.P. 167/2015 | Citation: Currently not available| Judge: SC Gupte  J| Date: 19 May 2020 | Available at: https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-375326.pdf    A. THE BACKGROUND Jackie and Ratnam were shareholders in Atlas. Atlas was a shareholder in MSM. Dispute arose concerning the sale

Continue reading
Categories: Agent |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Liquidated damages |  Most basic notions of morality and justice |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Considering and allowing a time-barred claim makes the award contrary to public policy of India, and irrational, and perverse, and lacking in judicial approach

     Updates by Saurabh Tiwari

KM Suresh Babu v. Sundaram Finance Limited Madras High Court; single-judge bench, M Sundar J; 05 March 2020 A. THE BACKGROUND Sundaram Finance (SF) financed a truck to Suresh under a hire-purchase contract. Suresh defaulted on the repayment of instalments on 06 April 1999. SF seized the truck on 17

Continue reading
Categories: Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Limitation |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34  

Standard for setting aside arbitral award; permissibility of re-appreciating findings of fact in set-aside proceedings; claim for damages et. al. (Delhi High Court) (7 January 2020)

     Updates by Avantika Verma , Aimen Reshi

G+H Schallschutz  v.  Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited 2020 SCC OnLine Del 19;  single-judge bench, Sanjeev Narula, J.; Decided on 07 January 2020 The Dispute Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (“BHEL”) signed a contract with the Public Electric Company, Yemen to construct a power plant. For manufacture of some equipments required in

Continue reading
Categories: Damages |  Interpretation of contract |  Patent Illegality |  Public policy |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Reappreciation of finding of fact |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Standard for setting aside award; Grounds under section 34 to set aside an award are not attracted if the tribunal’s finding is plausible, neither perverse nor contrary to evidence (Supreme Court)

     Updates by Nishant Gupta

The State of Jharkhand and others v. M/s HSS Integrated SDN and another, Special Leave to Appeal (sic Special Leave Petition) (C) No. 13117 of 2019 (non-reportable) Supreme Court, 2-judge bench, Arun Mishra and M.R. Shah, JJ.; decided on 18 October 2019   HSS Integrated and VKS Infra tech Management

Continue reading
Categories: Application of mind |  Patent Illegality |  Public policy |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Reappreciation of finding of fact |  Section 34 |  Section 37 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Standard for setting aside arbitral award (Delhi High Court)

     Updates by Ashish Kumar

Improve Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. v. VVA Developers (P) Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9793 High Court of Delhi; single-judge bench; Rajiv Shakdher J.; decided on 08 August 2019   An arbitral award passed in November 2017 was challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) claiming

Continue reading
Categories: Arbitrator's interpretation of contract |  Erroneous application of law |  Patent Illegality |  Setting aside arbitral award