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

1987 Supreme(Ori) 13

D.P.MOHAPATRA
PRAFULLA KUMAR SINGH DEO – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.K.PATNAIK, S.K.DAS GUPTA

D. P. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) THE short question that arises for consideration in this revision petition is whether the application filed by the petitioner under S. 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act ( for short 'the Act') for appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes is barred by limitation. The trial Court having answered the question in the affirmative, the petitioner has moved this Court in revision challenging the said order.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for the present proceeding may be shortly stated thus : The petitioner was entrusted with the work of construction of "s/r to approach road of Budhabalanga Bridge on 54th Mile of S. N. K. U. B. Midnapur Border Road - MDR 5 for 1974-75. " The parties executed an agreement bearing No. 92/f2 of 1974-75 for the purpose. After completion of the work, the amount under the final bill was paid to the petitioner on 30th July, 1978. The amount mentioned therein having fallen short of his claims, the petitioner is said to have represented to the authorities for paying him the balance dues. Having failed in his attempt to get his dues settled amicably, the petitioner issued a notice on 29-7-81 to the Chief Engineer (R. and B.), Governmen






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