The SC held that the HC has incorrectly exercised its ...

Arbitral Tribunal's discretion on cross-examination can't be lightly interfered by courts under Article 227.

January 6, 2025

Case Laws Indian Laws SC

The SC held that the HC has incorrectly exercised its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 in granting the respondent/claimant one more opportunity to cross-examine the appellant/respondent's witness, despite the Arbitral Tribunal rejecting such a prayer. The Tribunal had given full opportunity to all parties, and the respondent/claimant had already cross-examined the witness for over 12 hours. The SC observed that interference under Articles 226/227 is permissible only if the order is completely perverse, and the HC's order lacked justification in interfering with the Tribunal's directions. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The SC held that the HC has incorrectly exercised its ...

Arbitral Tribunal's discretion on cross-examination can't be lightly interfered by courts under Article 227.

January 6, 2025

Case Laws Indian Laws SC

You may also like:

Execution of the award passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal/Court - If the High Courts convert itself to the Executing Court and entertain the writ petitions under...

The Appellate Court exceeded its jurisdiction u/s 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by setting aside an arbitral award that had already been confirmed...

Right of the accused for cross-examination of parties, whose statement has been relied upon - In the writ appeal, while acknowledging that cross-examination is a part of...

Whether the High Court ought to interfere, under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, with an Order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal in a proceeding under the...

Validity of reassessment order u/s 147 - Denial of Cross-Examination Opportunity - Reliance of statement of third party - The High Court noted that the petitioner did...

The High Court addressed a case involving a violation of natural justice principles due to the rejection of the petitioner's request for cross-examination in a matter...

The summary focuses on the rejection of cross-examination of DRI officers and a co-noticee by the competent authority. The main objective of cross-examination is to...

Company under liquidation as per IBC - Validity of arbitration order while moratorium ordered by the NCLT was still in operation - This Court finds that the learned...

Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity for cross-examination. Evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be...

Violation of principles of natural justice - denial of cross-examination - revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty imposed by...

Principles of natural justice - rejection of cross-examination - The petitioner has approached this Court prematurely as the respondents have only rejected the request...

Dishonor of Cheque - seeking cross examination of the complainant officer of the bank - In the present application the recall, re-cross examination of the complainant is...

Doctrine of merger applied to impugned order of Appellate Tribunal imposing penalty on appellant. Held that since Supreme Court's judgment on appeal against Tribunal's...

Denial of cross-examination process of witness - ACIT restricted cross examination process by denying the questions asked by the Petitioner during cross examination -...

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants...

Quick Updates: