Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute between the legal representatives of M/s. V. G. Quenim (a proprietary concern) and Smt. Vilasini Vassudev alias Manohar Guiri Quenim (petitioners/appellants) against Bandekar Brothers Pvt. Ltd. (respondent). The dispute arose out of a contract between the parties which contained an arbitration clause. The matter was referred to arbitration, and the arbitrator passed an award on 30/04/2013. The petitioners challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Panaji, which was dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present writ petition and appeals under Section 37 of the Act. The main legal issues were whether the arbitration agreement was valid and whether the award was contrary to public policy. The court examined the arbitration clause and found it to be valid and binding. It also held that the award did not violate public policy as it was based on evidence and within the scope of the arbitration agreement. The court dismissed the writ petition and all appeals, upholding the arbitral award.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Validity of Arbitration Agreement - Section 7 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court examined whether the arbitration clause in the contract between the parties was valid and binding - Held that the arbitration agreement was valid and the arbitrator had jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes (Paras 10-15). B) Arbitration Law - Challenge to Arbitral Award - Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court considered whether the award was contrary to public policy under Section 34(2)(b)(ii) - Held that the award did not violate public policy and was not liable to be set aside (Paras 16-25). C) Arbitration Law - Appeal against Order under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court dealt with appeals against the dismissal of applications under Section 34 - Held that the appeals were devoid of merit and dismissed (Paras 26-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the arbitral award dated 30/04/2013 is liable to be set aside on grounds of being contrary to public policy or on the ground that the arbitration agreement was invalid?
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition and all appeals, upholding the arbitral award dated 30/04/2013.
Law Points
- Arbitration agreement
- validity of arbitration clause
- jurisdiction of arbitrator
- public policy challenge to arbitral award
- Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
