The single judge had delivered two judgments in July 2023 to uphold an arbitral tribunal’s 2018 award directing SpiceJet to refund ₹270 crores to Maran in a 2015 dispute.
By the 2023 ruling, the single judge also rejected appeals by SpiceJet as well as by Maran and his company KAL Airways challenging certain aspects of the arbitral award.
SpiceJet and its Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) Ajay Singh filed an appeal against this ruling before a Division Bench.
In May 2024, a Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the single-judge ruling.
The Division Bench also ordered that the challenge to the arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act be decided upon afresh.
In effect, the ₹270 crore refund ordered in favour of Maran was also put on hold by the High Court’s Division Bench.
Maran challenged this move before the Supreme Court, arguing that the Division Bench exceeded its jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court has now dismissed Maran’s plea and agreed with the High Court’s Division Bench.
“We are in agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench sending it back to a single judge for order again under section 34. The order has to be carefully articulated … The judge must apply mind to grounds of challenge and then deduce if interference (with the arbitral award) is warranted,” CJI Chandrachud said on Friday.
The top court also clarified that the matter should be reheard by a different single judge, not the judge who had passed the July 2023 ruling.
“Reading the single judge order, it does not seem there is any application of mind. The Delhi HC should now assign the case to a judge other than the single judge who was assigned the case,” the Supreme Court said.
Source: Barandbench
