Dispute Resolution

Challenging an Arbitral Award Under Section 34: Grounds and Limits

Courts rarely reopen an award on merits. Here is what Section 34 does and does not allow.

Challenging an Arbitral Award Under Section 34: Grounds and Limits

This article is general information only, not legal advice, and not solicitation of work. It should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice on your specific facts.

Section 34 Is Not an Appeal

One of the most misunderstood aspects of Indian arbitration law is that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not allow a court to review whether the arbitrator got the facts or the law right. Courts examine the award only on specific, narrow grounds, they do not reassess evidence or substitute their own view for the tribunal’s.

The Grounds That Are Available

A party can seek to set aside an award if it can show incapacity of a party or an invalid arbitration agreement, a failure to give proper notice of the arbitral proceedings or an inability to present its case, that the award deals with a dispute not contemplated by the arbitration agreement, that the composition of the tribunal or the procedure was not in accordance with the parties’ agreement, or that the award conflicts with the public policy of India, which includes being vitiated by fraud, corruption, or a fundamental breach of natural justice.

The Limitation Period

An application under Section 34 must be filed within three months of receiving the award, with a further extension of up to thirty days available if the court is satisfied there was sufficient cause for the delay. Beyond that, the award becomes final and enforceable, which makes early legal advice on whether genuine grounds exist important rather than optional.

What Happens if the Challenge Succeeds

If a court sets aside an award, the matter does not automatically get retried by the same tribunal. Depending on the ground on which the award was set aside, parties may need to commence arbitration afresh, which is one of the reasons courts are deliberately cautious about interfering with awards except in genuinely deserving cases.

This note is prepared by our Dispute Resolution team. If you are dealing with a related situation, get in touch with us.

← Back to all Insights