CLOSE
03 September 2021 | India Pistons Limited v. Rhenus Contract Logistics Ltd. | OSA (CAD) No. 72 of 2021| Sanjib Banerjee CJ and PD Audikesavalu J | Madras High Court | 2021 SCC OnLine Mad 5034
The claim was for the unpaid price of goods because the contractor did not meet the supply requirements. Upholding the dismissal of the set-aside petition, the Madras High Court found that the appellant did not demonstrate by referring to numbers, the quantum supplied, and the quantum expected of it in terms of the contract.
It said that the tribunal’s conclusions were correct, and the set-aside court’s decision was also proper. Dealing with the argument of inadequate reasons, the court said, reasons may be found even in a solitary sentence, whereas no shred of reasoning may be discovered in ten pages.
Also, the court noted that the Evidence Act, 1872 would not apply in terms, but the fundamental rules of evidence need to be applied by an arbitrator.
Read the decision here.
Categories: Applicability of Evidence Act | Application for Setting Aside Arbitral Award | Duty to Give Reasons | Form and Contents of Arbitral Award | Grounds for Setting Aside Arbitral Award | Implied Reasoning | Reasoned Award | Reasoned or Speaking Award | Section 34 ACA | Setting Aside Arbitral Award | Standard for Setting Aside Arbitral Award