Larsen and Toubro Limited v. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Karnataka heard cross-appeals under Section 13(1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging a Commercial Court order dismissing Section 34 petitions against an arbitral award dated 04.08.2018. BMRCL challenged Claims (ii), (iv) and (v) awarded to L&T; L&T challenged the rejection of Claim (iii) for time-related costs. The court set aside the award in respect of Claims (ii), (iv) and (v) on grounds of misapplication of contractual clauses and failure to adjudicate vital defences, and set aside the finding of entitlement under Claim (iii) and its rejection for want of proof, allowing parties to re-agitate Claims (iii), (iv) and (v) afresh.
What did the court decide?
The impugned arbitral award is set aside to the extent it awards Claims (ii), (iv) and (v) in favour of L&T, and to the extent it holds L&T entitled to compensation under Claim (iii) but rejects it for want of proof of quantum. Parties are at liberty to agitate Claims (iii), (iv) and (v) afresh.