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

1960 Supreme(Pat) 196

RAJ KISHORE PRASAD
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
D. P. Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Raj Kishore Prasad, J.

1. This application, in revision, is by the Union of India, as owner of the Northern Railway Administration, which, was opposite party to the application, made by the opposite party in this Court, under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (X of 1940), hereinafter referred to as "the Act", which has been allowed by the Court below and a pleader has been appointed as arbitrator in the case.

2. The relevant history of the case, leading up to the present application, may briefly be stated thus:

Samples of Mankatha sand were called for by the petitioner from the opposite party, who is a contractor, and, finally, sample No. 3 was approved. According to the terms of the contract between the parties, which is Ex. A, certain quantity of the said sand was to be supplied by the 2nd of July, 1956, which was the stipulated time for the supply. Admittedly, the opposite party supplied sand, as contracted for, but, two wagons, out of three wagons, of sand, which were sent out of time, after the stipulated date -- the 2nd of July, 1956, -- were not accepted, on the ground that those two wagons did not contain sand of the specification contracted for.

In the contrac


































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