PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ATUL S. CHANDURKAR
Balaji Steel Trade – Appellant
Versus
Fludor Benin S. A. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of arbitration-related facts and agreements. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 2. arguments by the petitioner and respondents regarding arbitration applicability. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. court's analysis on jurisdictional issues and contractual implications. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 4. final dismissal of the arbitration petition. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT
| Table of Contents | |
| I. | Introduction |
| II. | Facts |
| (i) | Buyer and Seller Agreement between Petitioner and Respondent No.1 |
| (ii) | Execution of Sales Contracts with Respondent No. 2 |
| (iii) | Execution of the Addendum |
| (iv) | HSSAs executed between Petitioner and Respondent No. 3 |
| (v) | Respondent No.1’s invocation of Benin Arbitration |
| (vi) | Petitioner’s institution of Anti-Arbitration Injunction Suit |
| (vii) | Filing of the Present Petition |
| (viii) | Culmination of Benin Arbitration: |
| III. | Submissions |
| (i) | Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner |
| (ii) | Submissions on behalf of Re |
Cox & Kings Ltd. V. SAP India (P) Ltd.
Mankastu Impex Pvt. Ltd. v. Airvisual Ltd.
Balasore Alloys Ltd. v. Medima LLC
SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Krish Spinning
Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc.
PASL Wind Solutions Pvt. Ltd. V. GE Power Conversion India Pvt. 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.