Section 34 arbitration challenge requires confined issues and fair affidavit evidence with cross-examination where needed.

Section 34 proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act are a special, summary challenge to an arbitral award, confined to the statutory grounds for setting aside the award. The party attacking the award bears the burden of proof, and CPC-style issue framing is not an integral requirement. Fair procedure may still require affidavit evidence from both sides, with cross-examination where warranted. On this reasoning, refusal to allow affidavit evidence was treated as erroneous, the issues were to be recast to conform to Section 34, and the petitioners were entitled to file affidavits with corresponding opportunity to the respondents.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a proceeding under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the issues framed by the court below required to be recast and the parties permitted to adduce evidence by affidavits with consequential opportunity for cross-examination.

Analysis: Section 34 provides a special and summary remedy for challenge to an arbitral award, and the scope of enquiry is confined to the specific statutory grounds for setting aside the award. The burden of proof lies on the party challenging the award, and the Supreme Court has clarified that framing of issues under the Code of Civil Procedure is not an integral part of such proceedings. At the same time, the procedure must remain fair and may include filing of affidavits in proof of the case and a corresponding opportunity to the opposite party to file affidavit evidence, with cross-examination permitted where the case warrants it.

Conclusion: The refusal to permit affidavit evidence was erroneous. The issues were to be recast in conformity with Section 34, and the petitioners were entitled to file affidavits of their witnesses with a corresponding opportunity to the respondents to place evidence by affidavit.

---