ABSTRACT

TOPIC: UNION OF INDIA V RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND OTHERS

(2018)

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 17(1)(ii)(c) and Section 19. Sustainability of
arbitral award is discussed in this case. UOI entered into PSC with respondent No.1 and 2. Work
Programmes and budgets were approved by Managing Committee as presented by RIL and
NIKO. Even though RIL and NIKO drilled lesser number of development wells they sought to
recover and appropriate costs for all 50 development wells. Arbitral Tribunal zeroed down
objections of UOI against request for disclosure made by respondents/Contractors and directed
disclosure of documents by UOI and respondent’s i.e. original claimants hence, instant appeal.

Whether, there is any illegality in impugned order of Arbitrator. Held, where direction issued by
Arbitral Tribunal is to detain, preserve or inspect any property or thing and, while giving effect
to such interim measures issue arises, Arbitral Tribunal after assessing situation, would be well
within its power to authorize person to enter land or building, which may be in possession of any
party or authorize taking of samples or making observation or having experiment carried out,
which may be considered necessary to obtain full information or evidence. Power u/s. 17(1)(ii)
(c) is not to order discovery of documents, which may be connected or related to property or
thing, which is subject matter of dispute in arbitration proceedings. Inspection of any property or
thing, which is subject matter of dispute in arbitration, would be different from ordering
discovery or inspection of documents, which are related to property or thing whether tangible or
intangible, which is subject matter of dispute. There is no difficulty in coming to the conclusion
that concomitant power of disclosure vests in Arbitral Tribunal by virtue of s. 19 and not s. 17(1)
(ii)(c) as legislative policy seems to be to prevent institution of appeals against such orders as
they have debilitating effect on conduct of arbitration proceedings. Appeal dismissed.

SUBMITTED BY

SAI VARSHINI T

17LLB077

SEMESTER VI