Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside an arbitral award dated 22/12/2016 passed in favour of the respondent, IMARTEK Sdn. Bhd. The dispute arose out of a contract between the parties. The petitioner contended that the award was contrary to public policy and perverse as the tribunal ignored material evidence. The respondent argued that the petition was barred by limitation and that the award was based on evidence. The court examined the limitation issue and found that the petition was filed on 22/05/2017, beyond the prescribed period of three months plus thirty days from the date of the award. The court noted that no application for condonation of delay was filed and no sufficient cause was shown. On merits, the court held that the tribunal's findings were based on evidence and not perverse, and that the court cannot reappreciate evidence under Section 34. The court dismissed the petition as barred by limitation and also on merits.
Headnote
A) Arbitration - Setting Aside Award - Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Limitation - Petition filed on 22/05/2017 against award dated 22/12/2016 - Court found that the petition was filed beyond the prescribed period of three months plus thirty days under Section 34(3) and no sufficient cause was shown for condonation of delay - Held that the petition is barred by limitation (Paras 1-5). B) Arbitration - Setting Aside Award - Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Public Policy - Petitioner challenged award on ground that it was contrary to public policy as the tribunal ignored material evidence - Court held that the tribunal's findings were based on evidence and not perverse, and the court cannot reappreciate evidence under Section 34 - Held that no ground for interference is made out (Paras 6-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the arbitral award dated 22/12/2016 is liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on grounds of being contrary to public policy, perverse, and barred by limitation.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The arbitral award dated 22/12/2016 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Limitation Act
- 1963
- Public Policy
- Perversity
- Reappreciation of Evidence
