The High Court
Case Details
2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) 112 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) DATE OF DECISION : ATE OF DECISION : JANUARY 29, 2025 HARYANA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (HSWC) LTD HARYANA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (HSWC) LTD HARYANA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (HSWC) LTD AND ANR …APPELLANTS Versus …RESPONDENTS …
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Mr. Jaspal Singh Pannu, Advocate or the appellants. for the , Advocate LAPITA BANERJI, J.(ORAL) LAPITA BANERJI, J. Main case JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 1 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) 2. Holding charges Holding charges 5,79,207-00 5,79,207 Economy charges Economy charges 2,50,292-00 2,50,292 Weighment charges Weighment charges 5,520-00 5,520 Vat on moisture cut Vat on moisture cut 18,388-00 18,388 Vat on less delivery of rice Vat on less delivery of rice 664-00 664 Total Total 8,54,071-00 8,54,071 Month Per cent Rice Rice due Rice Rice less to be delivered delivered delivered October and 20 per cent 6069.19 1618.40 4550.79 November 2012 December 25 per cent 7589.49 1618.30 10418.97 2012 January, 25 per cent 7586.49 5114.77 12890.67 2013 February, 15 per cent 4515.89 6739.40 10703.18 JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 2 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) 2013 March, 2013 15 per cent 4515.89 7812.14 7442.93 April 2013 --- May, 2013 -- -- -- 4851.03 2591.89 2587.91 --- 3. JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 3 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 4 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 5 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) 12. xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12. xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12. xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx It must clearly be understood that when a court is It must clearly be understood that when a court is applying the “public policy” test to an arbitration award, it applying the “public policy” test to an arbitration award, it applying the “public policy” test to an arbitration award, it does not act as a court of appeal and consequently er does not act as a court of appeal and consequently errors of does not act as a court of appeal and consequently er fact cannot be corrected. A possible view by the arbitrator on fact cannot be corrected. A possible view by the arbitrator on fact cannot be corrected. A possible view by the arbitrator on facts has necessarily to pass muster as the arbitrator is the facts has necessarily to pass muster as the arbitrator is the facts has necessarily to pass muster as the arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivers his arbitral. Thus an award based relied upon when he delivers his arbitral. Thus an award base relied upon when he delivers his arbitral. Thus an award base on little evidence or on evidence which does not measure up in on little evidence or on evidence which does not measure up in on little evidence or on evidence which does not measure up in ty of a trained legal mind would not be held to be invalid quality of a trained legal mind would not be held to be invalid quali on this score[1]. Once it is found that the arbitrators approach on this score[1]. Once it is found that the arbitrators approach on this score[1]. Once it is found that the arbitrators approach is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on facts. is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on fa is not arbitrary or capricious, then he is the last word on fa xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx An arbitral tribunal must decide in accordance An arbitral tribunal must decide in accordance with the terms of the contract, but if an arbitrator construes a with the terms of the contract, but if an arbitrator construes a with the terms of the contract, but if an arbitrator construes a term of the contract in a reasonable manner, it will not mean term of the contract in a reasonable manner, it will not mean term of the contract in a reasonable manner, it will not mean aside on this ground. Construction of that the award can be set aside on this ground. Construction of that the award can be set the terms of a contract is primarily for an arbitrator to decide the terms of a contract is primarily for an arbitrator to decide the terms of a contract is primarily for an arbitrator to decide unless the arbitrator construes the contract in such a way that unless the arbitrator construes the contract in such a way that unless the arbitrator construes the contract in such a way that it could be said to be something that no fair minded or it could be said to be something that no fair minded or it could be said to be something that no fair minded or reasonable person could do. It wa reasonable person could do. It was further held that it has been reasonable person could do. It wa opined by this court that when it comes to setting aside of an opined by this court that when it comes to setting aside of an opined by this court that when it comes to setting aside of an award under the public policy ground, it would mean that the award under the public policy ground, it would mean that the award under the public policy ground, it would mean that the award should shock the conscience of the court and would not award should shock the conscience of the court and would not award should shock the conscience of the court and would not include what the court thinks is unjust on the facts of the case include what the court thinks is unjust include what the court thinks is unjust seeking to substitute its view for that of the arbitrator to do seeking to substitute its view for that of the arbitrator to do seeking to substitute its view for that of the arbitrator to do what it considers to be “justice”. what it considers to be “justice”. xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 6 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 7 of 8 2024(O&M) FAO-5387-2024(O&M) 16.
Decision
application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Connected application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Connected JANUARY 29, 2025 JANUARY 29, 2025 Prince (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE speaking/reasoned : Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : Whether reportable : Yes/No Yes/No JYOTI THAKUR 2025.02.07 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Page 8 of 8