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

2000 Supreme(Del) 859

A.K.SIKRI, ARUN KUMAR
BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
C. N. GARG – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.NIGAM, J.C.SETH, PUJA ANAND, R.K.JAIN, REKHA PALLI

Arun Kumar

( 1 ) THE petitioner has filed this petition challenging the vires of Section 13 (3) and (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter REFERRED TO as the Act ). The petitioner has also made a prayer for a direction to remove respondent No. 1 from acting as Sole Arbitrator in the arbitration between the petitioner and respondent No. 2.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that the petitioner and respondent No. 2 entered into a contract on 12th August, 1994 under which respondent No. 2 was entrusted with the work of erection and commissioning of 3 x 160 TPH Boiler at Panipat Oil Refinery of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (for short IOCL ). Disputes and differences arose between the parties. As per the terms and conditions of the contract, which contained an arbitration clause, respondent No. 1, Mr. C. M. Garg was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator, on 10th April, 1997 by the petitioner. We may note here that respondent No. 1 is an ex-director of the petitioner and is also a member of the Indian Council of Arbitration. Respondent No. 1 entered upon the reference and issued notices to parties inviting claims. It appears that during the course of arbitration












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