Bhaven Construction vs. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd.&Anr. Civil Appeal 14665 of 2015 decided on 06/01/2021
Judgment Link:
Relevant paragraphs: 10. Having heard both parties and perusing the material available on record, the question which needs to be answered is whether the arbitral process could be interfered under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, and under what circumstance?
17. In any case, the hierarchy in our legal framework, mandates that a legislative enactment cannot curtail a Constitutional right. It is therefore, prudent for a Judge to not exercise discretion to allow judicial interference beyond the procedure established under the enactment. This power needs to be exercised in exceptional rarity, wherein one party is left remediless under the statute or a clear ‘bad faith’ shown by one of the parties. This high standard set by this Court is in terms of the legislative intention to make the arbitration fair and efficient.
20. Viewed from a different perspective, the arbitral process is strictly conditioned upon time limitation and modeled on the ‘principle of unbreakability’. If the Courts are allowed to interfere with the arbitral process beyond the ambit of the enactment, then the efficiency of the process will be diminished.
26. In view of the above reasoning, we are of the considered opinion that the High Court erred in utilizing its discretionary power available under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution herein.
Compiled by Sumana Chamarty, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 