Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
JYOTI SINGH
TPF Engineering Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initiation of arbitration under the 1996 act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenging termination and invoking arbitration. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. opposition to stay on termination notice. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. stay on termination due to arbitration invocation. (Para 8 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. directing stay on termination notice pending arbitration. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)--This is a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the `1996 Act'), filed by the Petitioners praying for an interim order staying the operation of the impugned notice dated 30.04.2022 issued by Respondents No.1 & 2 (hereinafter referred to as the `Respondents') seeking to terminate the Consultancy Agreement with the Petitioners.
2. The disputes between the parties emanate from the Contract Agreement dated 14.06.2017 executed between the Petitioners as `Authority's Engineer' and the Respondents for the Work of Replacement of Superstructure of Existing Four-Lane Mahatma Gandhi Setu over Ganga River in NH-19, Patna, Bihar, from 212.72 KM to 218.295 KM on Engineering, Procurement and Construction Mode.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petiti
The issuance of a termination notice does not terminate the contract if the affected party invokes arbitration within the stipulated period as per the agreement's clause.
The central legal point established is the enforcement of the dispute resolution mechanism and the appointment of a sole arbitrator as per the Contract Agreement and the Arbitration and Conciliation ....
A determinable agreement allows unilateral termination without conditions, and disputes do not justify a stay on that termination pending arbitration.
The Court's decision emphasized the importance of the Arbitral Tribunal in deciding interim relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the need for expeditious resolut....
The main legal point established is the recognition of urgency in interim relief and the direction for an expeditious hearing before the learned Arbitrator.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in the case of a determinable contract, no injunction against termination and enforcement of the contract can be issued.
The termination of the contract was found to be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, and no relief could be granted under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19....
A contract that is determinable in nature cannot be specifically enforced, and no injunction against termination and enforcement of the contract can be issued.
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
