NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

SC: Perversity in Award Due to Non-Consideration of Vital Evidence is Sufficient for Interference - (12 Nov 2024)

ARBITRATION

SC has observed that if there is a perversity in the award insofar as non-consideration of vital evidence is concerned, the same tantamounts to violation of fundamental policy of Indian Law as well as gives rise to a patent illegality, which is a sufficient ground for interference u/s 34 of A&C Act.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   VITAL EVIDENCE   FUNDAMENTAL POLICY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved