Supreme Court: Promotion Suitability Must be Decided by Experts, Courts Cannot Create New Methods  ||  SC: Market Integrity is Paramount; Rule Violators Cannot Escape Liability by Citing Investor Gains  ||  SC: Plaintiff's Reply to Counterclaim in Commercial Suits Must Meet Written Statement Deadline  ||  SC: Pre-2016 Debt Recovery Tribunal Recovery Certificates Cannot Support Insolvency Notices  ||  SC: Children's Court Cannot Try Child as Adult Without Passing a Reasoned Order under JJ Act  ||  SC: Contractual Clauses Denying Interest on Security Deposits Does Not Violate Public Policy  ||  J&K&L HC: Unamended Pleading Loses Effect After Amendment; Party Cannot Benefit From Own Default  ||  Allahabad HC: Wife's Maintenance Need Not be Fixed at 25% of Husband's Net Income  ||  Kerala HC: Social Customs Alone Cannot Prove Bride Entrusted Gold to Husband or In-Laws  ||  Karnataka HC: Century Club Qualifies as a Public Authority under the RTI Act Due to Land Grant    

SC: Modifying an Award u/s 34 and 37 Impermissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - (08 Jan 2024)

ARBITRATION

Supreme Court has held that interference with an order u/s 37 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can’t travel beyond restrictions laid down u/s 34 which means that the court can’t undertake an independent assessment of the merits of award.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION   INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved