Madhya Pradesh High Court: Writ Petition To Challenge Arbitral Award Not Maintainable, Section 34 Of A&C Act Remedy Prevails

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Writ Petition To Challenge Arbitral Award Not Maintainable, Section 34 Of A&C Act Remedy Prevails

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a writ petition aimed at challenging an arbitral award is not maintainable due to the availability of an effective alternative statutory remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Gajendra Singh's bench held that a writ petition should be summarily dismissed when a statutory appeal is available. It emphasized that parties cannot circumvent the statutory remedies provided under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

The petitioner contested an arbitral award issued by the arbitrator on 03.08.2023 under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.

The respondent raised an objection to the maintainability of the petition, arguing that there exists an alternative effective remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and therefore, the award should be challenged solely under the statutory provisions.

The court observed that an effective alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. It was noted that the petitioner can challenge all the grounds raised in the writ petition through statutory remedies under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 as well as the National Highways Act of 1956. The court emphasized that the petitioner cannot bypass these statutory provisions, especially considering that after adjudication under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the petitioner has the statutory remedy of appealing to the High Court under Section 37 of the Act of 1996.

Citing precedents such as Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Private Ltd. vs. Union of India, the court observed that the writ would not be entertained when the party has an efficacious statutory remedy. The Court held that a writ petition filed to challenge an arbitral award is not maintainable in view of the efficacious alternative statutory remedy available under Section 34 of the A&C Act.

Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.