URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE TRUSTEES LIMITED v. NEELKANTH MANSIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED
The judgment provides a detailed analysis of key provisions of the Arbitration Act and their interpretation.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-OS:9195
Decision Date: 23-06-2025
List of Laws
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: The judgment extensively discusses Sections 2(1)(c), 14, 15, 31, 32, and 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 2(1)(c) is discussed in relation to the definition of an "arbitral award" and whether an order passed by the arbitrator qualifies as such. Sections 14 and 15 are discussed regarding the remedy available when the mandate of the arbitrator terminates. Section 31 is discussed in relation to interim awards and the requirements for an order to qualify as an interim award, specifically referring to Section 31(6). Section 32 is the central focus, with detailed analysis of subsections (1), (2), and (2)(c). The court analyzes whether an order terminating proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) constitutes an arbitral award. Section 34 is discussed concerning the challenge to an arbitral award and whether it can be invoked to challenge an order passed under Section 32(2)(c). The court concludes that an order under Section 32(2)(c) is not an arbitral award and therefore not challengeable under Section 34.
🔒 For Members Only