Back
VIBHU BAKHRU
Engineers India Limited, Through Its Authorized Signatory – Appellant
Versus
Kimiya Engineers Private Limited, Through Its Director – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
1. Engineers India Limited (hereinafter ‘EIL’) has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the A&C Act’) impugning an Arbitral Award dated 01.09.2017 (hereinafter ‘the impugned award’) delivered by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a Sole Arbitrator (hereinafter ‘the Arbitral Tribunal’).
2. The impugned award was delivered by the Arbitral Tribunal in respect of disputes that had arisen between the parties in relation with an agreement dated 04.09.2013 (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’).
Factual Context
3. EIL entered into a Lease Deed dated 23.05.2011 with City and Urban Development Corporation, Maharashtra (CIDCO) for the construction of a multi-storied building for housing offices at Plot No. 85, Sector 11, Khargar, Navi Mumbai (hereinafter the ‘Project’), which was to be constructed within a period of four years.
4. EIL floated the first tender on 24.12.2012, which was later annulled. Thereafter, EIL issued a notice dated 22.05.2013, inviting bids for the construction of the aforementioned building. The respondent (hereinafter ‘KEPL’) emerged as the successful bidder and was awarded the Project.
5.
The court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal's decision on the termination of the Agreement and the award of sums for excavation of earthwork and service tax.
The court upheld the Arbitrator's findings that the rescission of the contract was unjust and delays were primarily attributable to the petitioner, affirming the award under Section 34 of the Arbitra....
The arbitral Tribunal found NHaI's actions to expel the respondent from the site was unjustified and illegal based on various grounds, including the delay in granting Extension of Time (EOT) and the ....
Excessive and unexplained delay in arbitral proceedings vitiates the award, impacting fairness and leading to its annulment under public policy and patent illegality.
The Arbitral Tribunal's decision falls within its jurisdiction and does not amount to patent illegality, as it was based on a plausible interpretation of the exclusionary clause in the contracts and ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 34 of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 to an international commercial arbitration, and the ....
The Arbitral Tribunal has considerable discretion in evaluating evidence and interpreting contract clauses, and its decision cannot be interfered with unless found to be patently illegal or in confli....
The inapplicability of the ground of patent illegality to international commercial arbitration and the importance of interpreting specific contractual clauses in determining the validity of claims an....
An expulsion under a contract must have legitimate causes, and unjustified actions by one party render such expulsion illegal, reaffirming constraints under arbitration frameworks.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
