Prohibition against reappraisal of evidence and merits evaluation by appellate courts

mandates that an appellate forum acting under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot function as an ordinary civil appellate court by conducting a de novo examination of the record. The authority of law to adjudicate upon contested facts and evaluate evidence lies exclusively within the domain of the arbitral tribunal chosen by the parties. An appellate court possesses no jurisdiction to sit in judgment over whether the arbitral award is substantively right or wrong based on a fresh reappraisal of evidence or material placed on record. The role of the appellate court is akin to that of supervisory superintendence, analogous to revisionary powers exercisable by civil courts, rather than a full-fledged merits review. Therefore, when the Section 34 court has correctly applied its limited jurisdiction and found no ground for interference, the appellate court cannot overturn the arbitral findings simply because it perceives the evidence differently or would have reached a divergent factual conclusion. (Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Tuticorin Port Trust | 2026 INSC 34)