Challenging an arbitral award: the narrow door under Section 34

Parties who lose an arbitration often arrive expecting a rehearing. Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not offer one. The court is not asked whether the arbitrator was right; it is asked whether the award can stand at all.

What the court will look at

• Whether a party was under some incapacity, or the agreement itself is invalid.
• Whether proper notice was given and the party was able to present its case.
• Whether the award decides matters beyond the scope of what was referred.
• Whether the composition of the tribunal or the procedure departed from the agreement.
• Whether the award conflicts with the public policy of India — including fraud, and, for domestic awards, patent illegality appearing on the face of the award.

What it will not look at

Re-appreciation of evidence. A different but equally reasonable reading of a contract. A view on quantum the court would not have taken itself. An arbitrator is the chosen judge of fact and of law, and an erroneous decision is not, by itself, a ground.

Before you file

1. Check the limitation period — it runs from receipt of the award and is short.
2. Identify the specific ground, not a general grievance; a petition that reads as an appeal is treated as one.
3. Consider whether enforcement will proceed in the meantime, and whether a stay is realistically available.
4. Weigh the cost of the challenge against the discount at which the award might settle.

A Section 34 petition filed as a reflex buys delay and pays for it twice.

Where a ground genuinely exists the remedy is real and worth pursuing. The discipline is in deciding honestly which case you have.