Skip to content

CS Professional · Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation · Challenge to Award and Appeals

A district court set aside an arbitral award in a dispute involving Patel Agro Ltd under Section 34. The High Court, hearing the appeal under Section 37, upheld the setting aside. Patel Agro wishes to pursue further remedies. Which statement is correct?

No second appeal lies from an order passed in appeal under Section 37, but Section 37(3) preserves any right to appeal to the Supreme Court. Patel Agro cannot appeal again within the High Court but may approach the Supreme Court.

  1. AA second appeal lies to a larger bench of the High Court
  2. BNo second appeal lies, but the right to appeal to the Supreme Court is not taken awayCorrect
  3. CNo further remedy of any kind exists
  4. DA second appeal lies to the district court

Explanation

Section 37(3) bars a second appeal from an order passed in appeal under the section. It expressly preserves any right to appeal to the Supreme Court. So a second appeal is barred, yet the Supreme Court route is not removed.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Challenge to Award and Appeals shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Challenge to Award and AppealsFree diagnostic mock

More Challenge to Award and Appeals questions