Justice Nariman then criticised the Supreme Court’s curative judgment in the Delhi Metro dispute.
The Court had set aside an arbitral award in favour of Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL) after finding that the judgment upholding it had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
According to Justice Nariman, the Court interfered with the award on a pure question of fact after the proceedings had attained finality.
He said that the arbitral tribunal had considered whether Delhi Metro Rail Corporation had cured the defects and whether it had taken effective steps to do so.
Whether a safety certificate established that effective steps had been taken was a matter for the arbitrators to decide, he added.
Justice Nariman then criticised the Supreme Court’s curative judgment in the Delhi Metro dispute. The Court had set aside an arbitral award in favour of Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL) after finding that the judgment upholding it had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
According to Justice Nariman, the Court interfered with the award on a pure question of fact after the proceedings had attained finality. He said that the arbitral tribunal had considered whether Delhi Metro Rail Corporation had cured the defects and whether it had taken effective steps to do so. Whether a safety certificate established that effective steps had been taken was a matter for the arbitrators to decide, he added.
“Now, that’s another big leap, because a certificate by itself can show nothing; that again is something for the appreciation of the arbitrator.”
He said that the ruling had introduced a broad ground of “miscarriage of justice” at the curative stage.
“We have a major problem now with this case, because all arbitral awards now have this chance of hopefully being interfered with on fact at the fag end in a curative petition if, finally, the court’s conscience, so to speak, is shocked.”
