27 December 2021, Monday

4 years ago

An arbitral tribunal is the final adjudicator of interim relief, and the scope of interfering with the merits of its interim relief order is as limited as interfering with an award: Delhi High Court

07 December 2021 | Spml Infra Limited v. Hitachi India (P) Ltd., | Arb. A (Comm.) 75 of 2021 | Vibhu Bakhru J | Delhi High Court | 2021 SCC OnLine Del 5221

The Delhi High Court has, in its appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 ACA, without commenting on the merits, refused to interfere with an arbitral tribunal's order directing the appellant to secure the amount in dispute in arbitration.

The tribunal had found prima facie that a sum of Rs. 1,51,40,981/- (prayer was for Rs. 3,40,66,948) was admittedly outstanding and payable. It directed the appellant to furnish a bank guarantee for that sum. The order was challenged mainly on the ground that it was not per Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

Justice Bakhru discussed the nature of the court's power and the “materially similar” power under Section 17 ACA. He also cited certain passages from authorities to the effect that the court should not find itself unduly bound by the text of CPC but is to follow the underlying principles.

He has also discussed the limited scope of examination under Section 37 ACA and noted that unless the decision of the forum chosen by the parties is patently illegal, the court will not interfere with such discretion. He has also pointed out that interfering with the merits of a tribunal's interim order would be the same as the scope of interference on merits of an arbitral award because an interim relief is in aid of the final relief.

He noted that the arbitral tribunal is the final adjudicator of such relief.

An argument that the respondent had waived its prayer for securing its claims in other proceedings was also rejected.

Read the decision here.

BACK Next

connect with us: