ARUN KUMAR, M.C.JAIN
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI – Appellant
Versus
ASIAN ART PRINTERS – Respondent
( 1 ) THESE eight appeals are directed against the judgment dated November 21, 1990 delivered by the learned Single Judge whereby the eight petitions under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act treated as suits (Suit Nos. 2026, 2233, 2286, 2273, 2291, 2348, 2642 and 2646 of 1990) were allowed and a direction was given that the arbitration agreements be filed in Court and the learned Single Judge appointed Shri Dalip Singh, Advocate as the sole arbitrator and referred the dispute for his decision.
( 2 ) THE dispute that has been referred relates to the question as to whether under the tariff issued by the appellant for the year 1990-91, the appellant can charge minimum guarantee charges in addition to the actual consumption charges.
( 3 ) ACCORDING to the learned Single Judge the dispute is covered under Clause 15 of the agreement. The respondent is a consumer of mixed load (HT) and the tariff in respect of mixed load (HT) regarding demand charges and another charges is as under :- Mixed load H. T. (a ). . . (b ). . . (e) TARIFF Demand Charges: Rs 40000 per month per KVA or part thereof of the committed load (as per load in the test report) plus Energy Charges; 67 paise per Un
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.