Back
Supreme Court Of India
R.C. LAHOTI, CJI., G.P. MATHUR AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, JJ.
MCDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL INC.-Appellant
Versus
BURN STANDARD CO. LTD. AND OTHERS-Respondents
IA No.2 in Civil Appeal No. 4492 of 1998,
Decided on September 8,2004
Advocates appeared
Dipankar Gupta, Senior Advocate (O.P. Khaitan, Anil Bhatnagar and Ms Bharti Badesra, Advocates for O.P. Khaitan & Co., Advocates) for the Appellant;
Dushyant Dave, Senior Advocate (Rudraman Bhattacharya and Ms Shipra Ghose, Advocates) for the Respondents.
ORDER
1. This IA is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. The learned Senior Counsel for the respondent applicant (objector) submits that in view of the provisions contained in Section 34 read with Section 2(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petition under Section 34 deserves to be heard by the Calcutta High Court (Original Side). The learned Senior Counsel for the appellant (opponent) disputes the correctness of this proposition.
3. In the order dated 28-8-1998 passed by this Court appointing the d arbitrator, it was made clear that:
"9. The learned arbitrator shall file the award in this Court.
10. Any application which may become necessary to be filed during or after the conclusion of arbitration proceedings, shall be filed only in this Court."
4. In view of the abovesaid clauses, we are of the opinion that the objection petition under Section 34 could have been filed only in this Court.
5. Let the petition be set down for hearing on merits.
6. The learned counsel for the parties seek time for making the submissions.
7. Adjourned.
8. The learned counsel for the objector submits that the objector proposes to file an application seeking an amendment in the objection petition. Let that application be filed within two weeks. The application shall be considered on its own merits when filed. Liberty to file reply in two weeks thereafter.
Court Masters
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
