Abstract
The question of standard of review in cases under Sections 34 and 48 of the 1996 Act remains uncertain, and courts have not dealt with this issue with any clarity. This, in fact, concerns more with the question of who would have the final say over arbitral decisions: whether it is the court, or the tribunal· and whether this would depend on the issue that was decided - procedural jurisdictional or substantive. This piece concludes that Sections 34(2)(a) and 48(1) of the 1996 Act entail a de novo standard of review, and that Sections 34(2)(b) and 48(2) entail a limited or restrictive standard of review, which is now statutorily expressed. What it ultimately points to is a balance of powers between courts and tribunals under the scheme of the 1996 Act.
Recommended Citation
Dunna, Gracious Timothy
(2018)
"Standard of Review in Set-Aside and Enforcement Proceedings Relating to Arbitral Awards in India,"
National Law School Journal: Vol. 14:
Iss.
1, Article 15.
Available at:
https://repository.nls.ac.in/nlsj/vol14/iss1/15