#Section 34 petition

Without the requisite stamp duty, an arbitral award cannot be treated as a valid instrument for execution. The Delhi High Court also stayed any enforcement while a Section 34 challenge remains pending, leaving the award ineffective until the petition is finally decided. This restricts award holders and creditors from pursuing recovery until both stamp duty is paid and the petition is resolved.

Delhi High Court held that a sole arbitrator appointed solely by one party breaches Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, rendering the award void. It cautions that contract clauses permitting unilateral appointments are ineffective without a written waiver, impacting commercial arbitrations.

The Bombay High Court reaffirms that courts must not re-evaluate evidence or substitute their own findings in arbitration appeals unless the tribunal’s reasoning is perverse, illegal, or violates natural justice. This reinforces the finality of arbitral awards and protects party autonomy in commercial disputes, signaling that judicial intervention is limited to procedural or jurisdictional flaws - not substantive disagreements.

Madras High Court condones 231-day delay in filing Section 34 petition under Arbitration Act, emphasizing commercial litigation standards and conditional relief.