THE EXCEPTION OF FUNDAMENTAL POLICY GIVEN U/S 34 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT MUST BE CONSTRUED NARROWLY: BOMBAY HIGH COURT The Bombay High Court while enforcing a foreign arbitral award noted that violation of a statute does not always violate the fundamental policy of Indian Law and this exception must be construed narrowly. Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for application for setting aside of arbitral award, under which an arbitral award may be set aside by the court if it is in contravention of fundamental policy of Indian law. In the present case Aircon Beibars FZE v. Heligo Charters Private Limited both the parties entered into a lease agreement and the respondent failed to pay the consideration amount. The settlement deed between them also failed and hence the petitioner-initiated arbitration proceedings, upon which an award was passed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the award must be enforced, however, the respondents contended that the award granted the payment of purchase price of the helicopters under a terminated agreement and the enforcement of such award would be against the fundamental public policy of India. The High Court following the pro-enforcement regime of India, held that the award was neither illegal nor against public policy as there was no application made by the respondents to set aside the award within a given period. Reddy and Reddy Law Firm comprises experienced and resourceful advocates and lawyers who advise and represent our clients in all dispute resolution forums. We have previously represented our clients in arbitral proceedings involving complex commercial disputes on various subject matters including insurance law, consumer law, government construction contracts, contractual breach etc.