|  |  | 

India Top Headlines

The judges must put themselves in the shoes of Parliament: SC | India News


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said that a judge, when interpreting a law, must try to understand the intent of the legislative bodies and annulled the Madras HC verdict that held that the court’s powers to “nullify” an arbitration award under arbitration law would also include the power to modify.
“It is quite obvious that if one were to include the power to modify an award in section 34 (Arbitration Act), he would be crossing the Lakshman Rekha … When interpreting a legal provision, a judge must put himself in the shoes of Parliament and then ask if Parliament intended this result. Parliament very clearly intended that there is no power to modify an award in section 34 of the Arbitration Act, ”said a bench of judges RF Nariman and BR Gavai. The court said that it is only up to Parliament to amend the provision in light of the courts’ experience in the operation of the 1996 Arbitration Act and adapt it to other laws around the world.
The court approved the order in an appeal filed by the Center against the HC order. Attorney General Tushar Mehta said that the Arbitration Act of 1996, based on the 1985 Model Law of International Commercial Arbitration of the UN Commission on International Trade Law, has specifically restricted the grounds for challenge and the subsequent remedy, which is only to void or remit in limited circumstances. The case refers to the litigation over the acquisition of land for national highways 45 and 220. However, the court dismissed the appeal for facts. “Since in several similar cases, NHAI has allowed similarly situated persons to receive compensation at a rate higher than that granted, and given the law set forth in the Nagpur Improvement Trust, we decline to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 136 in favor of the appellants in the facts of these cases, “said the bank.

Reference page