Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Lloyds Engineering Works Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Transparent Energy Systems Private Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of petition and factual backdrop (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against the impugned award's validity (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 3. court's analysis of arbitration proceedings and findings (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 36 , 38 , 41) |
| 4. clarifying the nature of claims and awards regarding bank guarantees (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 35 , 39) |
| 5. final order of the court modifying costs (Para 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. By this Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), Petitioner challenges Award dated 9 November 2023 of the learned Sole Arbitrator. By the impugned Award, the Arbitral Tribunal has allowed the claim of the Respondent by directing Petitioner to pay to the Respondent sum of Rs.23,97,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from 12 August 2008 till the date of realization.
2. Petitioner is an incorporated entity under the Companies Act, 2013, which was formerly known as Lloyds Steels Industries Limited. It is engaged in the business of engineering and infrastructure solutions, encompassing designing, manufacturing, fab
Wrongful encashment of a bank guarantee can be claimed as restitution rather than strictly under damages, highlighting the sufficiency of entitlement rather than extensive evidence. This determinatio....
The encashment of a performance bank guarantee does not require proof of loss, but must comply with the contract's terms; failure to evaluate these terms constitutes patent illegality.
Bank guarantees can be invoked regardless of disputes, unless fraud or irretrievable harm is clearly established.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal must be based on evidence and material on record, and the Court will not interfere with the award unless....
The court held that the rejection of KMC's claims for escalation, additional payment, early completion bonus, and loss due to non-release of Performance Bank Guarantee was not illegal. However, the c....
The court upheld the validity of the arbitral award, affirming the necessity for evidence of debt and reaffirming the co-extensive liability of the guarantor with that of the principal debtor, despit....
The arbitral tribunal's decision to deny claims for damages due to lack of supporting evidence is valid under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing minimal judicial interfer....
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
