Justice Viswanathan's Stand: Courts' Limited Role in Modifying Arbitral Awards

In a significant dissent, Supreme Court Justice K V Viswanathan disagrees with the majority verdict on modifying arbitral awards, highlighting the limitations under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. He stresses the distinct nature of appellate power and modification, underscoring the core ethos of arbitration and its procedural implications.

In a notable dissent, Supreme Court's Justice K V Viswanathan opposed the majority decision that courts have the power to modify arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.

A Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, ruled 4:1 in favor of the potential for modification, but Justice Viswanathan expressed his disagreement, outlining the distinctive nature of powers under Sections 34 and 37 of the Act.

Justice Viswanathan highlighted that the power to modify an award should not be conflated with the power to set it aside, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the arbitration process's foundational principles.

(With inputs from agencies.)