Supreme Court Dismisses Special Leave Petition Challenging Unreasoned Award by Arbitrator — Modification of Interest Awarded. The court found that the unreasoned award was not pressed before the High Court and modified the interest awarded.

  • 7
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a contract entered into by the parties in 1970-71, with an award made by the arbitrator in 1982. The petitioners challenged the award before the subordinate judge, who upheld it, leading to an appeal to the High Court that was dismissed. The petitioners then moved the Supreme Court by special leave, arguing that the unreasoned nature of the award warranted referral to a Constitution Bench, especially since similar matters had been referred. The Supreme Court noted that the point regarding the unreasoned award was not pressed before the High Court and that the arbitrator had been appointed from panels submitted by the parties. The court acknowledged that the validity of unreasoned awards was pending consideration by the Constitution Bench but decided not to refer this case, instead modifying the award to set aside the interest awarded from the commencement of the reference to the date of the award. The special leave petition was ultimately dismissed with this modification.

Headnote

A) Arbitration - Unreasoned Award - Validity of unreasoned award - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The petitioners contended that the unreasoned award should be referred to the Constitution Bench due to similar matters pending. The court found that the point of unreasoned award was not pressed before the High Court and declined to refer the matter to the Constitution Bench, modifying the award to set aside interest awarded from the commencement of reference to the date of the award. Held that the award is modified accordingly (Paras 146-148).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the unreasoned award by the arbitrator should be referred to the Constitution Bench for consideration.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition, modifying the award to set aside the interest awarded from the commencement of the reference before the arbitrator to the date of the award.

Law Points

  • Validity of unreasoned award
  • Modification of interest
  • Appointment of arbitrator
  • Reference to Constitution Bench
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1987 LawText (SC) (12) 16

S.L.P. (Civil) No. 7389 of 1987

1987-12-04

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

1988 AIR 1530, 1988 SCR (2) 145, 1987 SCC Supl. 708, JT 1987 (4) 588, 1987 SCALE (2) 1245

R.K. Mehta, Anil B. Divan, Vinoo Bhagat

STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS

CONSTRUCTION INDIA

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to an unreasoned award made by an arbitrator.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought to have the unreasoned award referred to the Constitution Bench.

Filing Reason

The petitioners contended that the unreasoned award was invalid and similar matters were pending before the Constitution Bench.

Previous Decisions

The subordinate judge upheld the award, and the High Court dismissed the appeal against this order.

Issues

Validity of unreasoned award Modification of interest awarded

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued for referral to the Constitution Bench due to similar pending matters. Respondent contended that the unreasoned award was not pressed before the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the unreasoned award was not pressed before the High Court and declined to refer the matter to the Constitution Bench, modifying the award regarding interest.

Judgment Excerpts

The award is modified to the extent that the interest awarded from the commencement of the reference before the Arbitrator to the date of the award, is set aside. In the facts and circumstances of this peculiar case, the matter is not referred to the Constitution Bench.

Procedural History

The petitioners challenged the award before the subordinate judge, who upheld it. An appeal to the High Court was dismissed, leading to a special leave petition to the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Rent Control Jurisdiction Case — Jurisdiction of Rent Controller Affirmed.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Mandamus Directing Acceptance of Basic Tax on Vested Forest Land - Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 and Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. The Court held that writ of mandamus cannot be issued to establish right...