The arbitrator decided an issue in its award. This award was impugned before the Single Judge a High Court under Section 34 of the Act.
The Single Judge opined that the said issue has not been decided correctly by the arbitrator and therefore the award shall be remanded back to the arbitrator to be decided afresh.
This order of the Single judge was challenged before the Division Bench of the High Court which affirmed the decision of the Single judge.
This order of the Division Bench was in appeal before the Supreme Court.
ISSUE–
Whether the Court has the power to remand the matter to the Arbitrator for a fresh decision?
JUDGEMENT –
In this case, the Court noticed and applied the decided position of law in Kinnari Mullick and held that the court while deciding a Section 34 petition has no jurisdiction to remand the matter to the Arbitrator for a fresh decision.
Therefore, the Court found that the Single Judge’s judgment was contrary to the settled position of law in Kinnari Mullick and Another vs. Ghanshyam Das Damani, (2018) 11 SCC 328,and as a result of which the Court set aside both the judgments of the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench.
The Supreme Court held that the limited discretion available to the Court under Section 34(4) to remand an award can be exercised only upon a written application made in that behalf by a party to the arbitration proceedings and such power could not be exercised by deferring the proceedings under Section 34 of the Act.
The Court made it clear that the Court cannot exercise this limited power of deferring the proceedings before it suo moto. Further, the limited remedy available under Section 34(4) is required to be invoked by the party to the arbitral proceedings before the award is set aside by the Court.
