28 July 2021 | PSA Sical Terminals Pvt. Ltd. v. Board of Trustees & others | Civil Appeal Nos. 3699-3700 of 2018 | RF Nariman & BR Gavai JJ | 2021 SCC OnLine SC 508
While recognising the limits to the court’s interference with the arbitral awards, the Supreme Court upheld an order of the High Court setting aside the award. The 2-judge bench found that the award was based on no evidence and without considering the relevant evidence. So, there was perversity as explained in Associate Builders v. DDA, (2015) 3 SCC 49.
Secondly, the award substituted the “royalty payment module” for the “revenue-sharing module.” The evidence showed that this was what SICAL always wanted, but the other party opposed it. Thus, the tribunal created a new contract. This attracted:
Access the judgment here.