Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Section 37- The Appellate Court can exercise the power of remand only when exceptional circumstances make an order of remand unavoidable. There may be exceptional cases where remand in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act may be warranted. Some of the exceptional cases can be stated by way of illustration: a. Summary disposal of a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is made without consideration of merits; b. Without service of notice to the respondent in a petition under Section 34, interference is made with the award; and c. Decision in proceedings under Section 34 is rendered when one or more contesting parties are dead, and their legal representatives have not been brought on record. (Para 18)
Practice and Procedure -The proceedings under Sections 34 and 37 are being treated as if the same are appeals under Section 96 of the CPC. 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. Everyone associated with the arbitral proceedings must remember that brevity will make the arbitral proceedings and the proceedings under Sections 34 and 37 more effective. All that we say is that all the stakeholders need to introspect. 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. (Para 23)