Back
P. D. NAIK, MANISH PITALE
Goa Shipyard Limited – Appellant
Versus
Shoft Shipyard Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of arbitration appeals and background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments by gsl on limitation and adjustments. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. discussion on issues arising in gsl's appeal. (Para 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. counterarguments from shoft. (Para 13 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. analysis of jurisdiction under section 37. (Para 20 , 21 , 24) |
| 6. court's decision regarding condonation of delay. (Para 23) |
| 7. arguments concerning interest payable. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 8. scope of jurisdiction under section 37 discussed. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 9. details on applications for condonation of delay. (Para 33 , 34 , 36) |
| 10. observations on limitation issues. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 11. set-off considerations analyzed. (Para 46 , 47 , 49 , 50) |
| 12. jurisdictional limits on modification of awards. (Para 51 , 52 , 59) |
| 13. court's decision on appeals. (Para 58) |
ORDER
Manish Pitale, J. - This is a bunch of thirteen appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), challenging orders passed by the District Court disposing of applications under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. While Goa Shipyard Limited (GSL) has filed ten appeals, Shoft Shipyard
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
