Goyal MG Gases Private Limited vs Steel Authority of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
V.KAMESWAR RAO
Goyal MG Gases Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Steel Authority of India – Respondent

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction defined by arbitration agreement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. exclusive jurisdiction rests with designated seat. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. disputes from arbitration proceedings initiated in specific venue. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. amendments to arbitration clauses require written consent. (Para 20 , 21)
5. judicial interpretation of weight of evidence in jurisdiction disputes. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. venue of arbitration synonymous with juridical seat under agreement. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)
7. final determination on court jurisdiction based on arbitration agreement. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)

JUDGMENT

V. Kameswar Rao, J. (Oral)--This petition has been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (`Act of 1996', for short) challenging the Award dated May 05, 2020.

2. A preliminary objection has been taken by Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the respondent that this petition is not maintainable in this Court. In this regard, he stated that the Agreement dated July 20, 2005 (`Agreement', for short) between the parties contains an arbitration clause in Article 25.4 (`arbitration clause', for short) which clearly st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTV.KAMESWAR RAOGoyal MG Gases Private Limited – AppellantVersusSteel Authority of India – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
V.KAMESWAR RAO
Goyal MG Gases Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Steel Authority of India – Respondent