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

2001 Supreme(Del) 652

J.D.KAPOOR
J. K. ANAND – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
I.C.Kumar

J. D. Kapoor

( 1 ) THROUGH this application under Sections 16 (c), 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, award dated 8/06/1994 Is sought to be set aside. The question Involved for determination is whether the Arbitrator was competent to reject the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the demand for Arbitrator was not made within 90 days from the date of the final bill as per clause 25 of the Agreement.

( 2 ) CLAUSE 25 of the agreement provides as under

"it Is also a term of the contract that If the contractor does not make demand of arbitration in respect of any claim in writing within 90 days of the Intimation from the Engineer-in-Charoa that the bill is ready for payment the claim of the contractor will be deemed to have been waived absolutely and the Delhi Development Authority shall be discharged and released of all liabilities under the contract in respect of those claims".

( 3 ) THE validity of the above clause of the agreement cropped up for consideration in M/s. Hindustan Construction Corporation Vs. Delhi Development Authority 77 (1999) DLT 165. In the aforesaid case also, the arbitration was not demanded within 90 days and the claims of the petitioner were dismissed




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