Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
IN-TIME GARMENTS PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
HSPS TEXTILE PVT LIMITED – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for condonation of delay in re-filing. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. facts of case detail purchase orders and subsequent disputes. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. discussion surrounding the validity and implications of section 34 challenges to awards. (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. relation of msmed act registration to entitlement for payment and timing of claims. (Para 11 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. final ruling dismissing the petition and maintaining the arbitrator's award. (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
I.A. 42145/2024
1. This is an application on behalf of the Petitioner for condonation of delay in re-filing.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of three days in re- filing is condoned.
3. The application is disposed of.
O.M.P. (COMM) 436/2024 & I.A. 42142/2024, I.A. 42144/2024
1. The instant petition is one under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an Award dated 01.06.2024 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator.
2. By virtue of the Award, the learned Sole Arbitrator has allowed the claim of the Respondent herein and has dismissed the counter claim of the Petitioner herein.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts which
The court upheld the Arbitral Award, affirming that timelines and knowledge of the transaction were not claimed by the petitioner regarding delayed delivery impact.
EM-II filing discretionary for micro/small enterprises beyond 180 days; MSMED reference limitation starts from buyer's post-investigation denial, not supply date; narrow Section 34 scope upholds awar....
The court emphasized that an arbitral award must be reasoned and address core contractual issues, with judicial intervention restricted to cases of patent illegality under Section 34 of the Arbitrati....
The court affirmed that failure to consider the MSMED Act's provisions on interest constitutes a significant error, leading to the setting aside of the arbitral award.
If any registration under the MSMED Act is obtained, the same will be prospective and would apply to supply of goods and services subsequent to registration but cannot operate retrospectively. Accord....
Jurisdictional challenges to arbitration awards must be raised under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, and the pre-deposit requirement under Section 19 of the MSME Act is mandatory.
The registration under the MSMED Act, 2006 applies prospectively and not retrospectively, and the benefits of the Act do not apply if the registration is obtained subsequently to the agreement and th....
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
