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

1991 Supreme(AP) 356

IYYAPU PANDURANGA RAO, V.BHASKARA RAO
Ram Prasad Construction Co. – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


BHASKAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revisi9n is directed against an order dated 15th July, 86 of the sub-court, Khammam, condoning the delay of 67 days in filing the O. P. , for making the award dated 29-10-1983 a rule of the Court.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts in brief are: Under a contract the revision-petitioner, was entrusted with some earth work of excavation of Madhira branch-canal by the respondent State of Andhra Pradesh. Since certain disputes arose during the execution of the said work between the parties, the matter was referred to a panel of arbitrators and an award was passed on 29-10-83. The state of Andhra Pradesh filed an application under section 17 of the arbitration Act, 1940 before the court below for making the award a rule of the court and passing a decree in terms thereof. Along with the said application, the respondent also filed the award. Though the award was received by the State on 5-6-84, while filing the application under Sec. 17 of the Arbitration Act on 5-9-1984, by way of abundant caution a petition to condone the delay in filing the suit, through the application referred to, was filed. The court below holding that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is applicable



















































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