P.K.BAHRI
M. L. DATMIA AND COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA – Respondent
( 1 ) IN a petition filed under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act by the petitioner. notice was given to the Umpire/respondent No. 2 in response to which he had filed the award and the proceedings in this Court. Notice of tiling of the award was given to both the parties. Both the parties have filed objections to the award. Following issues were framed :-
1. Whether the award is liable to be set aside or modified in view of the objections filed by the parties ? 2. Relief.
( 2 ) IT was agreed by the counsel for the parties, as mentioned in order dated 25th January 1993, that the question of grant of pendentelite interest which has not been decided by the Umpire be decided by this Court instead of remitting the award to the Umpire for the decision on this question. ISSUE N0. 1
( 3 ) FACTS leading to the giving of the award, in brief, are that in and about December 1977, a global tender was invited by the Government of Maldives to upgrade the existing airport of Hulule Island. The project was to be funded by Quwait and Saudi funds. Kocks Consult GMBH of Germany were the consulting engineers and Mr. Edwin Lutzman was the Resident Engineer.
( 4 ) RESPONDENT No. 1, on 12th D
REFERRED TO : Alopt Parshad Sons v. UOI
K.P.Poulose v. State of Kerala
Continental Construction Company Limited v. State MadhyaPradesh
Sundaram Trading Co. v. Govt. of Kerala
Madan Lal Roshanlal v. Hukumchand Mills Ltd.
Union of India v. Bungo Steel Furniture Private Limited
Puri Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. Unique Erectors
Hind Builders v. Union of India
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Indian Carbon Ltd.
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.