SHEKHAR APPU SHETTY Vs. RAVINDRA GANESH BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petition challenges an arbitral Award dated 18th October 2019. By that Award, to put it briefy, the claim of the present Petitioner, Shetty, was rejected entirely, and the opposing claim by the Respondent, Shet, was allowed. For reasons that will soon became apparent, I have not used the expression 'counter claim' to describe the pleadings presented by Shet before the learned sole Arbitrator.

(2.) I believe it is necessary in all Section 34 Petitions frst to clearly identify the precise ground for challenge and the scope of that challenge. As the Supreme Court has now repeatedly said, the challenge in Petitions under Section 34 are not in the nature of First Appeals or regular intra-court appeals. They have a far more restricted and limited remit. Any challenge must lie within the contours of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, and specifcally, sub-clauses (1), (2) and (2-A). To avoid any ambiguity, I will now reproduce these three sections:

(3.) This framework received extensive analysis in Associate Builders vs Delhi Development Authority .(2015) 3 SCC 49; These heads and their implicit sub-heads were all examined and legal dimensions and contours were specifcally set out.