Non-Speaking Judgments Cannot Be Passed While Dealing With the Objections Filed Under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

Abstract

The jurisdiction of the court in setting aside an arbitral award is limited and the court cannot correct the errors of the arbitrator in the award, however, the court can only quash the award leaving the parties free to begin the arbitration again if they so desire. An arbitral award being a decision of an arbitrator whether a lawyer or layman, chosen by the parties and entrusted with the power to decide a dispute, is ordinarily not liable to be challenged on the ground that it is erroneous. The construction of the agreement or a term of the contract is within the domain of the arbitrator and cannot be interfered with by the court simply to substitute its own interpretation where two possible views are available. Non-speaking judgments cannot be passed while dealing with the objections which are filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. A judgment deciding objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has to be a ‘speaking’ judgment.

Keywords: Arbitration, Section 34, Lex Unified, Judgments, Shivam Goel