Exhaustive and limited grounds of challenge under Section 34

ensure that an arbitral award is shielded from ordinary appellate review and can only be set aside under the precisely circumscribed grounds enumerated by the legislature. These permissible grounds are restricted to circumstances where a party suffered from legal incapacity, where the underlying arbitration agreement was invalid, where proper notice of the appointment or arbitral proceedings was denied, where a party was unable to present its case, where the award exceeded the scope of the submission, where the composition of the arbitral tribunal violated statutory or agreed procedure, or where the subject matter was non-arbitrable or conflicted with the public policy of India. Technical and procedural complaints, or mere dissatisfaction with the substantive conclusions reached by an arbitral tribunal, do not form legitimate bases for invoking judicial review under Section 34. To qualify as a violation of public policy, the arbitral award must be shown to contravene the fundamental policy of Indian law or breach the most basic notions of morality or justice, failing which the court has no jurisdiction to set aside the award. (Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Tuticorin Port Trust | 2026 INSC 34)