2019 (7) TMI 1822

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant : Mr. Jeetender Gupta, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv., Mr. R.L. Batta, Adv., Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv., Mr. Nishant Kr., Adv., M/s. Unuc Legal Llp, AOR ORDER 1. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, we find that the judgment of the High Court is liable to be set aside on one ground alone. The High Court entertai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... set aside the partial award. This is clearly contrary to law. This court in the case of SBP & Co. vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. & Anr., reported in (2005) 8 SCC 618 in Paragraph No. 45 held as follows. "45.It is seen that some High Courts have proceeded on the basis that any order passed by an arbitral tribunal during arbitration, would be capable of being challenged under Article 226 or 22....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. But that would not alter the status of the arbitral tribunal. It will still be a forum chosen by the parties by agreement. We, therefore, disapprove of the stand adopted by some of the High Courts that any order passed by the arbitral tribunal is capable of being corrected by the High Court under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. Such an intervention by the High Courts is not per....