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

2005 Supreme(Chh) 281

A.K.PATNAIK, V.K.SHRIVASTAVA
Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services, Inc. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

A.K. Patnaik, C.J.

1. The two miscellaneous appeals are appeals under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Indian Act").

2. The facts briefly are that an agreement dated 22-4-1993 was executed between the appellant and the respondent under which the respondent was to supply installed equipment for modernization and upgradation of the production facilities of the appellant at Korba in the State of Chhattisgarh. The agreement provided for settlement of disputes by arbitration, Certain disputes arose between the parties and were referred to arbitration. The arbitration was held in England and the arbitral tribunal made two awards dated 10-11-2002 and 12-11-2002 in England. The appellant thereafter, filed applications under Section 34 of the Indian Act for setting aside the two awards dated 10-11-2002 and 12-11-2002 in the Court of learned District Judge, Bilaspur which were numbered as MJC Nos. 92 of 2003 and 14 of 2003, respectively. By order dated 20-7-2004, the learned District Judge, Bilaspur held that the applications filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Indian Act for setting aside the two foreign awards

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