Back
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
NTPC Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Tata Projects Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
IA No. 2565/2023 and IA No. 6924/2023
The present applications have been filed on behalf of the petitioner, seeking liberty to produce additional evidence to be taken on record by this Court submitting to the effect that the said documents/additional evidence are necessary for proper adjudication of the instant petition. These documents despite exercise of due diligence were not made a part of the Arbitral record which was filed before this Court. Hence, the petitioner now prays that the documents as sought to be taken on record vide these applications.
For the reasons stated in the applications, the applications are allowed and the documents are taken on record.
The applications stand disposed of.
O.M.P. (COMM) 59/2023
1. The instant petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "the Act, 1996") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
"a. Call for the records of the arbitration proceedings; and/or
b. Quash and set aside the Award dated 14.09.2022 passed by the Ld. Tribunal, limited and confined to the extent where the award has been against the petitioner-NTPC; and/or
c. Award cost of
Point of law: Scope of examination under Section 34 is limited. The decision of the Arbitral Tribunal regarding consideration and interpretation of the Contract is final and this Court cannot supplan....
Every error of law committed by an arbitral tribunal does not fall within the scope of the patent illegality. However, the Court had also clarified that illegality, which goes to the root of the matt....
The Arbitral Tribunal's interpretation of reimbursement based on actual costs incurred due to statutory changes is valid, despite disputes over contract terms, reinforcing the principle of contractua....
An arbitrator may award escalated costs due to employer delay despite prohibitory clauses, reinforcing that delays affecting contractor performance can lead to compensatory claims.
The Court held that the petitioner failed to establish that the impugned Award suffered from patent illegality or contravened the fundamental policy of Indian law or public policy of the country. The....
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
