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

2005 Supreme(Del) 889

O.P.DWIVEDI
NOIDA TOLL BRIDGE COMPANY LTD – Appellant
Versus
MITSUI MARUBENI CORPORATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.CHANDHIOK, Himanshu Dodiya, RAMESH SINGH, Sudhir Sharma, SUREKHA RAMAN, Valmiki Mehta

O. P. DWIVEDI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner above named has filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 ( for short the act ) against order dated 17. 11. 2004 passed by Arbitral Tribunal holding that the prohibition contained in Section 69 of the Partnership Act is not applicable to the proceedings before Abitral Tribunal. The petitioner herein is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and the respondent herein is an unincorporated joint venture between two Companies incorporated outside India. In October 1996, the petitioner had invited bids for the construction of the Delhi-Noida Bridge Project under an engineering, procurement and construction contract (hereinafter referred to as EPC Contract ). In response thereto respondent submitted their bid which was accepted vide letter of acceptance dated 24. 12. 1997. An agreement was signed between the petitioner and the respondent on 19. 1. 1998 in Tokyo, Japan, for execution of the Delhi- noida Bridge Project. The said agreement also contains an arbitration clause. On dispute having arisen between the parties the matter was referred to Dispute Review board in terms of sub-clause 67.

















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