Supreme Court Of India Rules Against The Maintainability Of Section 34 Of The Arbitration Act, 1996 Against A Foreign Arbitration Award: Case Comment
Dr Surepalli Prashanth
The Supreme Court recently in Noy Vallensina Engineering SpA vs. Jindal Drugs Limited and Ors.2 was critical of the Bombay High Court ruling that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would apply to Foreign Awards and thus, reiterates the principle laid down in BALCO v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc.3 in regard to application of Part I in foreign seated arbitrations.
A Background Description of the Dispute:
The Appellant Company is engaged in setting up and construction of plants which helps in carrying on the business of production of synthetic fibers, polymers and ascorbic acid which was incorporated under Italian law.
While the Respondent Company is a public limited company set up according to Indian Law. The Respondent company entered into an agreement on 30.01.1995 with Enco, a company from Switzerland to provide for technical information and basic documentation for construction, commission, operation and maintenance of ascorbic acid plants in lieu of total fee of Swiss Francs 86,00,000 which was paid by the Respondents.
