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
VIBHU BAKHRU, AMIT MAHAJAN
Web Overseas Limited – Appellant
Versus
Universal Industrial Plants Manufacturing Company Private Limited – Respondent


Table of Content
1. background of the appeal and interim award (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. factual context of the contract (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. debate on limitation periods (Para 18 , 19 , 24)
4. significance of notices under section 21 (Para 67 , 70)
5. final judgement and order (Para 71 , 72)

JUDGMENT

Vibhu Bakhru, J. The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter `the A&C Act') impugning an order dated 24.06.2020 (hereafter `the impugned order') rendered by the learned Commercial Court. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned Commercial Court rejected the appellant's application preferred under Section 34 of the A&C Act [being OMP (COMM) No. 20/2018 captioned Web Overseas Limited v. Universal Industrial Plants Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd.], impugning an interim award dated 01.10.2018 (hereafter `the impugned award') passed by the Arbitral Tribunal. In terms of the impugned award, the appellant's contention that the counter-claim preferred by the respondent was barred by limitation, was rejected.

2. The Arbitral Tribunal had accepted that the respondent had not issued any notice under Section 21 o

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