Back
PANKAJ BHANDARI, PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur – Appellant
Versus
Atlanta Ltd. , Having Its Registered Office At 101, Shri Amba Shanti Chamber, Mumbai- Andheri (East) Mumbai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
1. Appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) aggrieved by Order dated 17.06.2019 passed by Commercial Court No.3, Jaipur, whereby the objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act was dismissed and the Award dated 07.09.2014 passed by Arbitral Tribunal was confirmed.
2. It is contended by Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, counsel appearing for the appellant that a Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) Agreement was entered into between the appellant and the respondent. The total period of the Agreement was 11 years and 8 months, which included the construction period of 18 months. The period for collection of the toll was till 15.05.2008. It is contended that the respondent initially filed a claim which was allowed. In the earlier award, Arbitral Tribunal has extended the concession period till 31.07.2010. It is argued that in the present award, compensation has been given for termination of the concession period on 15.05.2008 and compensation has been awarded for period 15.05.2008 to 30.11.2008 and that the present award is overlapping with the earlier award.
3. It is also cont
The court ruled that non-disclosure of material facts in arbitration proceedings constitutes grave misconduct, rendering the arbitral award illegal and overlapping with previous awards.
The court clarified that the powers under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot extend to granting specific performance of a contract or automatic extensions beyond terms explicitl....
The Court emphasized the limited scope of interference in appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act and upheld the findings of the Arbitral Tribunal and the Single Judge based on plausibility a....
The court affirmed that the Tribunal's rejection of the appellant's request for interim measures was valid due to established insufficient funding and non-compliance, affirming limited grounds for in....
Point of Law : Arbitration - Concession Agreement – Maintainability of writ - Power under Article 227 of Constitution in a rare and exceptional circumstance - When an alternative and efficacious reme....
A concession period extension under a contract requires compliance with specific procedural conditions, and is not automatic despite recommendations from an independent engineer.
The court confirmed that the scope of interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act is limited, emphasizing the binding nature of arbitration agreements.
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
