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

DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
MCL KSIPL (JV) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Table of Content
1. appointment of arbitrator under specified conditions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. parties agree to arbitration despite disputes. (Para 5)
3. details regarding the appointed arbitrator's role and fees. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. final order for petition disposal. (Para 10)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Present petition has been preferred under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.

2. Petitioner claims to be carrying its business of construction works in India. According to petitioner, respondent invited item rate tenders for the work of "Completion of balance works for construction of dwelling units including allied services for Officers JCOS/OR at Port Blair (Army)" and petitioner's bid was accepted vide its letter dated 28/10/2014 for an amount of Rs.438,29,06,684/- and time for completion of work was stipulated as 28 months.

3. Petitioner claims that the site for work was handed over to it by the respondent on 22.12.2014 and therefore, the work was to be concluded by 21.04.2017. However, due to various hindrances on the part of respondent, like non-availability of site, decisions and other hindrances and beaches of co

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