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

2003 Supreme(AP) 1066

B.PRAKASH RAO
Govt. of Madhya Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
P. V. Vidyasagar – Respondent


B. PRAKASH RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, by way of this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seek to assail the orders dt. 11-3-2003 passed by the sole arbitrator Srip. V. Vidyasagar in Arbitration Case No. 3 of 2001 impleading the petitioners as parties to the reference.

( 2 ) HEARD both sides. The learned Counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the proceedings of the- arbitrator. A few facts which are necessary for the disposal of this revision are that the arbitration reference has been made to the sole arbitrator appointed at the instance of the parties, in pursuance of an agreement executed in August, 1997 on the plea raised as to the non-joinder of parties namely the petitioners herein. The sole arbitrator impleaded them. The main objection on behalf of the petitioners is that they were impleaded without giving any prior notice and opportunity and further they were sought to be added after a lapse of five years and therefore the same is barred by limitation. To consider the objection raised on behalf of the respondents as to the maintainabili


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