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

1983 Supreme(AP) 280

A.SEETHARAM REDDY, C.V.RAMULU
N. V. Chowdary – Appellant
Versus
Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. , Visakhapatnam – Respondent


SEETHARAMA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE two C. M. As. Arise out of a common order and so they will be disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) THE appellant filed a suit in O. S. No. 150/83 on the file of the Ist Additional Subordinate Judge, Vizag. , for permanent injunction and pending the same, he filed I. A. 291/83 for interim injunction restraining the respondent from terminating the contract. The interim injunction was granted. Thereafter the respondent herein filed two applications I. A. 280/83 for vacating the interim injunction and I. A. 281/83 for stay of trial of the suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. By common order dated 15-7-1983, the injunction was vacated and stay of the trial of the suit was ordered. Hence, the aforesaid two C. M. As.

( 3 ) A brief format of the case may be drawn: Visakhapatnam Steel Project (V. S. P.), entered into a contract with the respondent-company, a Government of India Undertaking, with the 100% share-capital, for levelling up the entire land within the area earmarked towards the Project. The respondent in turn entered into various subcontracts, the one being in favour of the appellant-sub-contractor herein. The work entrusted to the app

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