DIPAK MISRA, AMITAVA ROY
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. – Appellant
Versus
APPLIED ELECTRONICS LTD. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dipak Misra, J.
Leave granted.
2. The present appeal, by special leave, calls in question the legal tenability of the order dated 28th July, 2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi wherein a Division Bench in CM No. 15530 of 2013 placing reliance on Satpal P. Malhotra & Ors. vs. Puneet Malhotra & Ors., Arbitration Appeal No. 12 of 2010 decided on 14th June, 2013 that has followed the decision in MCD vs. International Security & Intelligence Agency Ltd., (2004) 3 SCC 250 has expressed the view that the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') would be applicable to the proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the 1996 Act). Be it stated, while expressing the view that the CPC is applicable to an appeal preferred under Section 37 of the Act, the High Court has in the impugned order opined that the cross objection preferred by the respondent herein was maintainable and accordingly entertained the same after condoning the delay.
3. Assailing the said order, it is submitted by Mr. N.K. Kaul, learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the appellant, that the scheme of the 1996 Act does not grant any space or make any provision a
ITI Ltd. v. Siemens Public Communications Network Ltd.
SBP & Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd.
Pandey & Co. Builders (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar
Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. v. Jindal Exports Ltd.
Jamshed Hormusji Wadia v. Board of Trustees, Port of Mumbai
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.