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

1981 Supreme(Del) 140

AVADH BEHARI ROHATGI
ALKARMA – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.K.Khanna, Rajesh Lakhanpal, Raman Lakhanpal, RAMPAL AGARWAL

AVADH BEHARI ROHATGI, J (ORAL)

( 1 ) THE facts. This case raises a rather interesting point. It arises upon a petition under s. 20 of the Arbitration Act (the Act ). It arises in this way Shri Jai Kishan Das of M|s Alkarma, petitioner, is a contractor. He entered into a contract with the respondent, Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for the execution of work of construction. He was awarded the work of fixing aluminium windows in Vikas Minar, a building where DDA sits. This work was awarded to him in 1973.

( 2 ) THE contractor did the work. While the work was in progress certain disputes arose between the parties. The contract contains an arbitration clause. This is clause 25. It reads :

"except where otherwise provided in the contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned and as to the quality or workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever, in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, design, drawings, specifications, estimates, instruction, orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works, or the execu









































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