PROJECT DIRECTOR Vs. JOGENDAR PARSOTTAM SHETIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. Maulik Nanavaty, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant - National Highway Authority of India and Mr. Mehul Sharad Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the claimant (original applicant).

(2.) This appeal under Sec. 37 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 (for short "the Act, 1996") is at the instance of the National Highway Authority of India and is directed against the judgment and order passed by the 10th Additional District Judge, Kachchh at Bhuj dtd. 22/2/2021 in the Civil Miscellaneous Application No.103 of 2018 filed by the claimant under Sec. 34 of the Act, 1996. The impugned final order (operative order) reads as under:-

(3.) The principal argument of Mr. Nanavaty, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that the court below in exercise of power under sec. 34 of the Act,1996 could not have modified the award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal.