Back
Kerala State Electricity Board – Appellant
Versus
Alankar Construction Company – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S. Manu, J.
1. Appellants are the respondents in W.P. (C) No. 19299 of 2021. The respondent herein approached this Court by filing the writ petition praying mainly for a direction to the 2nd appellant to calculate, sanction and disburse the amount as per the Adjudicator's decision with respect to the disputes notified as per claim (m) and (n) in Ext.P7 and decided by the Adjudicator by Ext.P12 within a time frame and for interest on the said amount.
2. The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in civil construction works was awarded with a work by the Kerala State Electricity Board Limited (KSEBL). Name of the work is “DRIP-Idukki Hydro Electric Project-Rehabilitation including remedial measures and basic facilities-improvement of approach roads to Idukki and Cheruthoni Dam – (part-II works)”. Agreement was executed on 16.6.2016. The agreement contains an adjudication clause. As per the said clause if the parties to the contract notified a dispute, same shall be referred to an Adjudicator at the first instance. Whenever the Adjudicator takes decisions, either party may refer the decision of the Adjudicator for arbitration within 28 days of the Adjudicator's decision. If no
The Adjudicator's decision is binding if not challenged within 28 days, emphasizing the enforceability of dispute resolution clauses in contracts.
The decision of an Adjudicator is binding if not challenged within the stipulated time, emphasizing the importance of contractual dispute resolution mechanisms.
The appointment of an Arbitrator comes after the decision of the Adjudicator, and the Adjudicator and the Arbitrator are two distinct forums for dispute resolution under the contract.
The Supreme Court clarified that an Arbitral Tribunal's jurisdiction encompasses all disputes arising from a contract unless expressly limited, and failure to issue a notice under Section 21 of the A....
The court upheld the arbitral tribunal's authority to decide disputes not found in the Adjudicator's decision, and found no grounds to interfere with the Arbitral Award under Section 34 of the Arbitr....
The limitation period for arbitration references under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam commences from the communication of the Dispute Board's decision, and the petitioner filed within this ....
Adjudication decisions under CIPAA 2012 are valid and enforceable unless substantial breaches of natural justice occur; interim resolutions are crucial for maintaining cash flow in construction dispu....
A clause restricting arbitration claims to 28 days is void under Section 28(b) of the Indian Contract Act, but the arbitral tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by deciding disputes not referred to it.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the detailed and exhaustive dispute resolution mechanism specified in the contract provides various options for the petitioner to exercise if ....
A procedural failure of the Superintending Engineer does not negate a petitioner's entitlement to appeal, provided the requisite timelines for reference and appeals are respected.
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
