#Finality of Arbitral Award

The Bombay High Court has ruled that a party’s refusal to complete procedural formalities-like signing bank documents or filing partnership forms-after a final arbitral award is issued constitutes an unlawful obstruction of enforcement. This holding reinforces that the finality of arbitral awards cannot be undermined by passive non-cooperation, even absent a Section 34 challenge, and binds all parties to act in good faith to give effect to the award.

The Allahabad High Court has affirmed that once objections to an arbitration award are dismissed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the executing court is bound by that decision and cannot revisit the validity of the award or the arbitrator’s appointment. This reinforces the finality of arbitral awards and prevents serial litigation in execution proceedings, safeguarding the efficiency of alternative dispute resolution.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that executing courts lack authority to alter the interest period or amount specified in a final arbitral award, even if the debtor claims a bona fide dispute. This upholds the sanctity of arbitral awards under Section 36 ACA and prevents collateral challenges during enforcement, directly impacting award holders seeking precise recovery and debtors attempting to renegotiate terms post-award.