SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(Ori) 96

A.MISRA
KALINGA OTTO (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
CHARANJIT KOCHHAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.C.Bhashra, A.K.MITRA, K.N.Sinha, P.ROY, R.Jhunjhunwala, S.MOHANTY

A. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THE facts giving rise to this revision application, in brief, are as follows: the petitioner who entered into a contract with the Hindusthan Steel Ltd. , rourkela, for making certain constructions in connection with the extension of the latter's coke-oven plant engaged the opp. party as a sub-contractor to carry out certain works concerning the contract. In or about April, 1966, the work was completed and the parties agreed by correspondence to refer their disputes to two arbitrators, one to be nominated by each. Accordingly, Shri B, Das and Shri A. K. Sen were nominated as arbitrators by the petitioner and opposite party respectively. The two arbitrators by their letter dated 15-12-67 informed the parties that they had appointed Shri N. C. Deb as umpire and entered on the reference. At the first meeting of the arbitrators held on 23-2-68, it was decided that issues involved in the reference would be disposed of by them without participation of the umpire and the points on which they failed to agree would be referred to the umpire. On 25-11-68, an application was filed before the learned subordinate Judge, Sundergarh for extension of time to make the award who b










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