Featured image for Supreme Court Judgment dated 18-10-2019 in case of petitioner name The State of Jharkhand & Ors. vs M/s HSS Integrated SDN & Anr.
| |

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Jharkhand Road Construction Dispute

Updated on

The Supreme Court of India, in The State of Jharkhand & Ors. v. M/s HSS Integrated SDN & Anr., upheld an arbitral award in favor of a consultancy firm engaged in the construction of a six-lane divided carriageway of the Ranchi Ring Road. The Court dismissed the appeal by the Jharkhand government, affirming that the contract termination was illegal and that the arbitration findings were justified.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose from a consultancy agreement between the State of Jharkhand and M/s HSS Integrated SDN for supervisory services related to the Ranchi Ring Road project. The contract, signed on August 28, 2007, had an initial term of 36 months, running from October 1, 2007, to September 30, 2010. However, due to various project delays, the contract was extended twice.

Issues arose regarding alleged non-performance and unsatisfactory work by the respondents. The State issued multiple notices highlighting deficiencies and ultimately terminated the contract on March 12, 2012, under Clause 2.9.1 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC). The respondents contested the termination, leading to arbitration proceedings.

Arguments by the Petitioner (State of Jharkhand)

The State of Jharkhand put forth the following arguments:

  • The termination was justified due to unsatisfactory performance and failure to comply with project deadlines.
  • Multiple notices were issued, yet the respondents failed to remedy deficiencies in supervisory services.
  • The arbitral award was flawed, as it ignored key evidence indicating breach of contract by the respondents.
  • The High Court erred in dismissing their appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Arguments by the Respondents (M/s HSS Integrated SDN & Anr.)

The respondents countered with the following points:

  • The termination was arbitrary and did not follow the contractual procedure.
  • They had addressed all deficiencies cited by the State, yet payments were unlawfully suspended.
  • The arbitral tribunal rightly concluded that the State acted unreasonably in terminating the contract.
  • The claims awarded by the tribunal were justified, covering unpaid invoices, loss of profit, and interest.

Supreme Court’s Observations

A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and M.R. Shah made the following key observations:

  • The termination of the contract was illegal and did not adhere to the contractual procedure.
  • The arbitral tribunal’s findings were based on evidence, and there was no reason for judicial interference.
  • Under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act, courts have limited scope to interfere with arbitral awards.
  • The tribunal had partly allowed claims and also disallowed some, indicating a balanced assessment.
  • The High Court correctly upheld the arbitral award and dismissed the State’s appeal.

The Court stated:

“When findings are based on evidence and reasonable interpretation of contract terms, courts should not interfere with arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled:

  • The appeal by the State of Jharkhand was dismissed.
  • The arbitral award in favor of M/s HSS Integrated SDN was upheld.
  • The State was directed to honor the compensation awarded by the tribunal.
  • No further costs were imposed on the State.

Implications of the Judgment

The ruling has significant implications for contract enforcement and arbitration law in India:

  • Enforcement of Arbitral Awards: The judgment reinforces that courts should not interfere with arbitration decisions unless there is clear evidence of irregularity.
  • Protection of Contractors: Contractors engaged in government projects have legal recourse if contracts are unfairly terminated.
  • Adherence to Contractual Terms: The decision underscores the importance of following due process before terminating contracts.
  • Limited Scope of Judicial Review: Courts must respect arbitration findings unless they are perverse or against public policy.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in The State of Jharkhand v. M/s HSS Integrated SDN & Anr. upholds the sanctity of arbitral awards and ensures that government agencies cannot arbitrarily terminate contracts without following due process. By affirming the arbitral tribunal’s findings, the ruling strengthens the arbitration framework in India and provides confidence to contractors and service providers working on public infrastructure projects.


Petitioner Name: The State of Jharkhand & Ors..
Respondent Name: M/s HSS Integrated SDN & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Arun Mishra, Justice M.R. Shah.
Place Of Incident: Ranchi, Jharkhand.
Judgment Date: 18-10-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: The State of Jharkha vs Ms HSS Integrated S Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 18-10-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Arbitration Awards
See all petitions in Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
See all petitions in Enforcement of Awards
See all petitions in Judgment by Arun Mishra
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all allowed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category

Similar Posts