Avoid Bulky Pleadings & Lengthy Submissions In Arbitration Appeals : Supreme Court To Advocates

Expressing displeasure over the filing of bulky and lengthy submissions in the arbitral proceedings, the Supreme Court on Monday (July 8) called upon the Bar to urge only the legally permissible grounds in the arbitration proceedings carried under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 

“When members of the bar take up so many grounds in petitions under Section 34, which are not covered by Section 34, there is a tendency to urge all those grounds which are not available in law and waste the Court's time. The time of our Courts is precious, considering the huge pendency. This is happening in a large number of cases. All this makes the arbitral procedure inefficient and unfair. It is high time that the members of the Bar show restraint by incorporating only legally permissible grounds in petitions under Section 34 and the appeals under Section 37.", the bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal said.

The Court believed that the growing tendency amongst the members of the bar to rely upon a large number of precedents, whether relevant or irrelevant, results in a very long hearing before the Courts in Sections 34 and 37 proceedings.

"Case after case, we find that the arbitral proceedings have become synonymous with very bulky pleadings and evidence and very long, time-consuming submissions, leading to very lengthy awards. Moreover, there is a tendency to rely upon a large number of precedents, relevant or irrelevant. The result of all this is that we have very long hearings before the Courts in Sections 34 and 37 proceedings.", the court said.

After perusing the pleadings made before the High Court and itself, the Court was surprised to note that 151 grounds in a petition under Section 34 and 164 grounds in an appeal under Section 37 were made. The Court remarked that most of the grounds urged by the petitioner are unsustainable in law making the entire process as cumbersome and time-consuming.

"As per the practice in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, a memorandum of appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act does not contain the facts but only the grounds of challenge. In the memorandum of appeal preferred by the respondent consisting of 46 pages, 164 grounds have been incorporated. Considering the narrow scope of interference under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act, we cannot comprehend how there could be 151 grounds in a petition under Section 34 and 164 grounds in an appeal under Section 37. It is not surprising that this appeal has a synopsis running into 45 pages, and it contains as many as 54 grounds of challenge.", the Court said.

The Court asked everyone associated with the arbitral proceedings to remember that brevity will make the arbitral proceedings and the proceedings under Sections 34 and 37 more effective. According to the Court, all the stakeholders need to introspect on filing lengthy pleadings and submissions running into hundreds of pages otherwise the very object of adopting the UNCITRAL model will be frustrated.

"Arbitration must become a tool for expeditious, effective, and cost-effective dispute resolution.", the court said.

Case Title: Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited Versus Samir Narain Bhojwani

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 445

Click here to read/download the Judgment