SANJAY KUMAR, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Lancor Holdings Limited – Appellant
Versus
Prem Kumar Menon – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR, J
1. Two questions arise for consideration in these appeals: -
(ii) Is an arbitral award that is unworkable, in terms of not settling the disputes between the parties finally while altering their positions irrevocably thereby leaving them no choice but to initiate further litigation, liable to be set aside on grounds of perversity, patent illegality and being opposed to the public policy of India? If so, would it be a fit case for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution?
In this case, the learned Arbitrator reserved his arbitral award on 28.07.2012 but pronounced it only on 16.03.2016, i.e., nearly three years and eight months later, with no definite resolution of the matter. Significantly, no explanation worth the name was offered by him for the delay.
2. The issue of delay in the delivery of an arbitral award is relevant now only in the context of the period prior to insertion of Section 29A in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act of 1996’), which put in place stringent timelines for passing of an
Harji Engg. Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. and another
Peak Chemical Corporation Inc. vs. National Aluminium Co. Ltd.
Union of India vs. Niko Resources Ltd. and another
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Saw Pipes Ltd.
Oil India Limited vs. Essar Oil Ltd.
Oil India Limited vs. Essar Oil Limited
Director General, Central Reserve Police Force vs. Fibroplast Marine Private Limited
K. Dhanasekar vs. Union of India
Unique Builders vs. Union of India
GL Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd. vs. Delhi Development Authority
R.C. Sharma vs. Union of India and others
Kanhaiyalal and others vs. Anupkumar and others
Bhagwandas Fateh Chand Daswani vs. HPA International
MMTC Limited vs. Vedanta Limited
Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Limited vs. National Highway Authority of India
Associate Builders vs. Delhi Development Authority
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited vs. Western Geco Internation Limited
Gayatri Balasamy vs. ISG Novasoft Technologies Limited
OPG Power Generation (P) Ltd. v. Enexio Power Cooling Solutions (India) (P) Ltd.
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.
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.