SANJAY DHAR
State of J. & K. – Appellant
Versus
C. R. Engineering Construction Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. By this common judgment, two appeals, one filed by the State of Jammu and Kashmir through Chief Engineer, Power Development Corporation (M.A No.144/2013) and the other filed by M/S C.R. Engineering Construction Pvt. Ltd., (AA No.9900001/2013) against the judgment and decree dated 11.06.2013 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as the ‘District Court’), are proposed to be disposed of.
2. The instant appeals owe their origin to an award dated 31.08.2005 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal that was challenged by both the parties by filing objections thereto before the Court below where the award was submitted by the Arbitral Tribunal for making it rule of the Court in terms of the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act, Svt. 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Old Act’). Vide the impugned judgment and decree, the District Court, after modifying the award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal to a certain extent, made it rule of the Court.
3. The impugned judgment and decree of the District Court has been assailed by both the p
Arosan Enterprises Ltd. vs. Union of India
Food Corporation of India vs. Joginder Pal Mohinderpal and another
State of Rajasthan vs. Puri Construction Co.
Arosan Enterprises Ltd. vs Union of India and another
Executive Engineer, Dhenkanal Minor Irrigation Division, Orissa vs. N.C. Budharaj
Secretary Irrigation Department, Government of Orissa vs. G.C. Roy
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. vs. State of J&K (1992) 4 SCC 217
Claims in arbitration must be filed within the limitation period; time-barred claims render an arbitral award illegal and against public policy.
Setting aside arbitral award – Courts, while adjudging whether an arbitration award calls for interference has to be conscious that Arbitrator is sole Judge of facts – Unless an error of law is shown....
Judicial intervention in arbitration is limited, focusing on procedural irregularities rather than merit assessments.
Point of law : learned Arbitrator in his discretion can award pendentelite and future interest from the date of award till realization of the awarded amount because the terms of the contract did not ....
The court emphasized that arbitral awards should not be interfered with solely based on disagreements with findings, affirming the limited grounds for appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.