Court cannot interfere with an award in a Section 34 petition if the view taken by the arbitral tribunal is a plausible one. (Bombay High Court)

     Update by Saloni Jaiman

Niko Resources Limited v. Gujrat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd.  Case Number: Commercial Arbitration Petition 484 of 2017 | Citation: Currently not available|  Judge AK Menon J | Court: Bombay High Court| decided on 9/06/2020| Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/142413589/   On 9 June 2020, the Bombay High Court dismissed a petition for setting aside

Continue reading
Categories: Damages |  Perversity |  Quantification of an award |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Review on the merits of the dispute |  Section 34  

An award can be set aside if the tribunal’s interpretation of the contract is perverse or is not a possible view. (Supreme Court of India)

     Update by Samarth Madan

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. (SEAMEC Ltd.) v. Oil India Limited, Court: Supreme Court of India | Case Number: C.A. No. 673/2012 | Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 451| Judges: NV Ramana, Mohan M Shantanagoudar, Ajay Rastogi JJ | Date: 11 May 2020 | Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/108276358/

Continue reading
Categories: Perversity |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award