Back
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Harji Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(T.S. Sivagnanam, C.J.)
1. This intra-Court appeal filed by the writ petitioner is directed against the order dated 6th July, 2023 in W.P.A. 12900 of 2023. In the said writ petition, the appellant had challenged the action of the 2nd respondent in floating a new tender with regard to the subject work through ‘Risk and Cost’ of the petitioner/appellant, who was initially awarded the tender, which stood terminated consequently. As against the order of termination, the appellant has rightly invoked the arbitration clause and notices have also been issued and the appellant has also moved an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity, “the Act”) before the learned single Bench of this Court. We are informed by the learned advocate appearing for the appellant that the arguments have been heard by the learned single Bench and orders have been reserved.
2. The learned advocate appearing for the 2nd respondent/tendering authority submits that in the said application filed under Section 9 of the Act, an order of status quo has been granted and the 2nd respondent has questioned the jurisdiction of the learned single Bench of this Cour
The actions taken by the petitioner pursuant to the termination of the contract can be determined subject to the final outcome of the arbitral proceedings.
Arbitration agreement - Order of termination of contract - Jurisdiction of learned Arbitrator having been circumscribed by the order of reference of this Court, no fault can be found with interpretat....
An order terminating arbitral proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) of the A&C Act is not an award and can be challenged under Section 14(2) of the A&C Act. Delay in appointing an arbitrator may warrant....
Waiver principles emphasize binding effects of authorized communications, limiting claims to amended terms unless formally contested, as upheld in arbitration contexts.
A court lacking jurisdiction to entertain an arbitration application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 renders its order unsustainable.
Arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by acting prematurely and failing to provide a reasoned award, necessitating the setting aside of the invalid award.
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
