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

1981 Supreme(Del) 183

G.R.LUTHRA
VILLAYATI RAM MITTAL – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


G. R. LUTHRA

( 1 ) THE present petition is under Sections 8 and 20 of Indian Arbitration Act 1940 for filing of agreement and making an appointment of an arbitrator.

( 2 ) THE petitioner, as he alleges, entered into a contract with the respondents for construction of "construction of Load Despatch Centre for N. R. E. B. at Katwaria Sarai. New Delhi. " There was an arbitration clause in the agreement. It is alleged bv the petitioner that disputes arose on account of which he sent a letter to the Chief Engineer Construction Zone Central Works Department New Delhi to appoint an arbitrator in accordance with the arbitration agreement. He has attached a copy of the letter as annexure along with the petition.

( 3 ) THE petition was contested by the respondents. They inter alia pleaded that the petition was not legally maintainable because it did not detail disputes which had arisen between the parties. Following preliminary issue was framed:

1. Is the petition as framed legally maintainable? Issue

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondents relies upon a judgment of Mr. Justice Sultan Singh in Rai Bahadur Basakha Singh and Sons (Contractors) Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Drugs and Pharmaceutical Ltd. A





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