Section 34 Arbitration Act 1996 governs SETTING ASIDE of ARBITRAL AWARD:
Ano challenge (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019)) (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019))
Brecourse to a COURT against an arbitral award may be made ONLY on grounds specified — incapacity, invalid agreement, no notice, beyond scope, composition issues, conflict with public policy, fraud, patent illegality (domestic awards only)
Cany reason (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019)) (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019))
Dany time (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019)) (cf. Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019))
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. recourse to a COURT against an arbitral award may be made ONLY on grounds specified — incapacity, invalid agreement, no notice, beyond scope, composition issues, conflict with public policy, fraud, patent illegality (domestic awards only)
1. Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019) governs SETTING ASIDE of arbitral awards.
2. Section 34(1): recourse to a court against an arbitral award may be made only by an APPLICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE such award.
3. Section 34(2): an arbitral award may be set aside only if:
4. (a) A PARTY furnishes proof that:
5. (i) the party was under some INCAPACITY;
6. (ii) the AGREEMENT was not valid;
7. (iii) the party was not given PROPER NOTICE of appointment or the proceedings, or was otherwise unable to present his case;
8. (iv) the award deals with a dispute NOT CONTEMPLATED BY the agreement;
9. (v) the COMPOSITION of the arbitral tribunal or the procedure was not in accordance with agreement of the parties.
10. (b) The COURT finds that:
11. (i) the SUBJECT-MATTER is not capable of settlement by arbitration; OR
12. (ii) the arbitral award is in CONFLICT with the PUBLIC POLICY of India.
13. EXPLANATION 1: 'public policy' includes: (i) fraud or corruption; (ii) contravention of fundamental policy of Indian law; (iii) shocking the conscience.
14. EXPLANATION 2: 'patent illegality' (domestic awards only) — narrowed by 2015 amendment.
15. Section 34(3): application within 3 MONTHS of receiving award; extendable by 30 days for sufficient cause.
16. 2019 Amendment added Section 34(2)(a)(iv) — narrowing of public policy review.
17. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (Bare Act) + Mediation Act 2023 — Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, Section 34 (substantially amended 2015 and 2019)_
Related questions
In SBP & Co. v. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD (2005) 8 SCC 618, the Supreme Court held that the JUSection 28 Arbitration Act 1996 specifies APPLICABLE LAW:Section 39 Arbitration Act 1996 grants the arbitral tribunal LIEN on the:INTERIM AWARD under Arbitration Act 1996:Section 38 Arbitration Act 1996 (DEPOSITS) requires parties to:DOMESTIC ARBITRATION versus INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION:Section 21 Arbitration Act 1996 defines COMMENCEMENT OF ARBITRATION as:Section 43 Arbitration Act 1996 (LIMITATION) provides that the period of LIMITATION ACT 19