Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has held that “Section 34(4) is a limited remedy” and “It is not a vehicle for reopening the merits of the award or for inviting the learned Arbitrator to re-adjudicate concluded issues.”
The dispute arose from a 1995 agreement to sell a plot of land. After an arbitral award directed execution of the sale deed upon payment of ₹10 crore, the sellers approached the Commercial Court under Section 34 and also sought remand of the award under Section 34(4).
The High Court observed that the Commercial Court had erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 34(4), clarifying that a Court hearing a Section 34 petition is fully empowered to decide such an application on its merits.
However, the Division Bench dismissed the application after finding that the appellants were, in substance, challenging the merits of the arbitral award rather than pointing out any curable defect.
The Court observed that the grounds relating to limitation, readiness and willingness, appreciation of evidence, valuation of the property and reasoning in the award were all matters concerning the validity of the award and could not be reopened through Section 34(4).
Reiterating the limited scope of the provision, the Court held that Section 34(4) is intended only to cure procedural defects or enable the Arbitrator to supply reasons where necessary, and cannot be invoked for a fresh adjudication of the dispute.
The Bench, however, clarified that all objections raised by the appellants may still be urged in the pending Section 34 proceeding
It further directed that those proceedings shall be decided by the learned learned Commercial Court uninfluenced by the present order