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

2018 Supreme(SC) 1218

D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, VINEET SARAN
SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for Appearing Parties
For the Appellant :Ms. Soumya Dutta, Advocate.,
For the Respondent:Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J

1. The present appeal arises from the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Calcutta by which the respondent’s application for condoning a delay of 514 days in filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the 1996 Act’) was allowed [The High Court delivered judgment on 27 April 2016].

2. The appellant, who is a contractor, entered into an agreement for the construction of 821 units of permanent shelters in the tsunami-hit Andaman and Nicobar Islands with the Union of India, represented by the Executive Engineer, Andaman Central Division, Central PWD, Port Blair [The date of the agreement is 5 January 2006]. The scope of work involved the construction of single storied permanent shelters, including internal water supply, sanitary installation and internal electrification. Due to differences with regard to the performance of the construction work, the parties were referred to arbitration. On 27 October 2014, the arbitrator made an award in favour of the appellant and directed the








































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