GOUTAM BHADURI, RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL
State Of Chhattisgarh – Appellant
Versus
Learn Nature Consultants Partnership Firm, Through Its Partner Shri Abhisekh Sharma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Goutam Bhaduri, J]
Heard.
1. The present appeal is against the judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed by the Commercial Court, Raipur, whereby the Court below has affirmed the arbitral award dated 11.12.2017 passed by the sole arbitrator under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1996').
2. The brief facts falls for consideration in this appeal is that the non-applicant herein M/s. Learn Nature Consultants, which is said to be a consultancy partnership firm, entered into an agreement with the department of Forest to develop a World Class Jungle Safari as per the Central Zoo Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'CZA') norms and guidelines at Naya Raipur. The consultancy was for preparation of master plan followed by Detailed Project Report (DPR) and supervision for development of Jungle Safari project at Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The non-applicant being the successful bidder entered into an agreement vide Ex. P-1 on 27.03.2012. The non-applicant, who filed a petition before the sole arbitrator claimed that they have prepa
State of Chhattisgarh and another Vs. Sal Udyog Private Limited
Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited Vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited
Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. Versus National Highway Authority of India
ONGC v. Western Geco International Ltd.
Kanchan Udyog Limited Versus United Spirits Limited
R.K. Malik and another Vs. Kiran Pal and others
Mcdermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. & Ors.
The findings of the Arbitrator, that the claimants are not entitled to damages from the respondents; the breach of the MOU on the part of the KMDA, recorded before the Arbitrator, are sustainable and....
The court affirmed that an entity can claim compensation for work performed under a non-finalized contract if the work was conducted at the direction of another party, underscoring the principle of q....
The limited grounds for interference with an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, emphasize the concept of patent illegality and the criteria for setting asi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an Arbitrator's decision must be within the terms of the contract and based on evidence. The approval of the final project cost by the Central....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.