By LE Staff


1. Ram Chander Arjan Dass v. National Textile Corporation Ltd  (Punjab And Haryana HC) 

It is not disputed that there is no provision in the Act which takes the power of review from the Court acting under the Arbitration Act. In that situation, the power of review is applicable to the Courts when they decide matters under the Arbitration Act. The above view is supported from the observations of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Their Workmen : A.I.R. 1958 S.C. 153.

2. The Punjab State Co-Operative Supply and Marketing Federation, Limited v. Panchsheel Rice Traders, Rajpura. District Patiala and Ors (Punjab And Haryana HC) 

In M/S Ram Chander Arjan Dass””s case (supra), the question involved was whether the Arbitrator had the power of review or not. It was held by this Court that the provisions of the Code are applicable to the proceedings under the Arbitration Act and there was no provision in the Act which takes the power of review from the court under the Arbitration Act and therefore, the Court was competent to review its orders.[…]d-v-panchsheel-rice-traders-rajpura-district-patiala/14d3d2

3. Maheshwari Brothers Ltd. vs National Highways Authority Of India (Calcutta HC) 

It is thus clear that while dealing with a proceeding under Section 9, the Court shall have the same power for making orders as it has for the purpose of and in relation to any proceeding before it. Most of the time proceedings under Section 9 are invoked before the commencement of an arbitral process. Therefore, the availability of the review powers of a Civil Court to a Section 9 proceeding cannot be ruled out in view of Section 5 of the said Act. Section 9 proceedings before such a Court are undoubtedly proceedings in a Court of a civil jurisdiction. While dealing with such proceedings, such Courts will “have the same powers for making orders as it has for the purpose of and in relation to any proceedings before it”. This is the mandate of Section 9. There is no specific exclusion of review powers of a Civil Court as is there in the case of second appeal (Section 37(2) of the said Act).

4. Maharashtra Explosives Limited v. Sadiq and Company (Bombay HC at Nagpur

The powers of review can very well be said to be specifically conferred on the court exercising jurisdiction in the proceedings under section 8 of the Arbitration Act. Even if, therefore, there is no independent provision in the Arbitration Act itself regarding the powers of review of the Court in the proceedings under the Arbitration Act, by virtue of section 41 making applicable the entire provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure to all proceedings before the Court under the Arbitration Act, the powers of review as contained in the Civil Procedure Code have to be held as specifically conferred on the Court dealing with the proceedings under the Arbitration Act.

5. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors v. Pratibha Industries Ltd. and Ors (Supreme Court) 

To similar effect is the judgment in Shivdeo Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab Ors. (AIR 1963 SC 1909), wherein the Supreme Court has stated as under: 

10. … It is sufficient to say that there is nothing in Article 226 of the Constitution to preclude a High Court from exercising the power of review which inheres in every Court of plenary jurisdiction to prevent miscarriage of justice or to correct grave and palpable errors committed by it.

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment