SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 212

M.B.SHAH, S.N.PHUKAN
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Manager, Jain And Associates – Respondent


JUDGMENTS

Shah, J.-Leave granted.

2. Question involved in this appeal is - whether provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure ( for short referred to as "the CPC") or the principles thereof are applicable in a case where objections under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short referred to as "the Act") are not filed and ex-parte decree is passed on the basis of the award filed before the Court by making the award rule of the Court. The High Court has arrived at the conclusion that Order IX Rule 13 CPC is not applicable in such cases.

3. Before appreciating the contentions, we would refer to few dates pertaining to the question involved. Both the parties to the present appeal were having disputes regarding the work of design and construction of two lane road bridge (both sub-structure and super structure) across Feeder Canal at R.D.16.5 (Balance Work). In a Special Suit No.31 of 1993 filed by the present respondent, the High Court of Calcutta vide its order dated 25.6.1993 directed appointment of Arbitrator to settle their disputes. The Arbitrator passed an award on dated 28.12.1996 against the appellants herein which was filed before the High Court on 6
























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top