IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. PANIGRAHI
Hotel Sea Point Pvt. Ltd., Puri – Appellant
Versus
Blueline Resorts Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lease agreement and jurisdictional issues (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments against arbitrator's order (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. writ jurisdiction and its limits (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. judicial interference minimized per arbitration act (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. nature of arbitration and high court's role (Para 34 , 36 , 39) |
| 6. scope of high court's intervention in arbitration matters (Para 44 , 46) |
| 7. admissibility of unstamped agreements (Para 47 , 49 , 50 , 52) |
| 8. jurisdiction and enforcement issues with stamp act (Para 54 , 56 , 60) |
| 9. grounds for interference with arbitral award (Para 62 , 63) |
| 10. conclusion and order of the court (Para 64) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Writ Petition is preferred by the Petitioner against order dated 1.8.2022 passed by the Ld. Sole Arbitrator purporting the same to be an award wherein the Petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,31,94,711/- along with cost of Rs.15,00,00/- within two months from the date of the award to the Respondent on the basis of breach of the Lease Agreement dated 01.05.2012.
2. The Petitioner is a company which has taken on lease the land from one, Mr. Durga Charan Rautray on w
SMS Tea Estates (P) Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. (P) Ltd
Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. v. Jindal Exports Ltd.
Food Corpn. of India v. Indian Council of Arbitration
Union of India v. Popular Construction Co.
P. Anand Gajapathi Raju v. P.V.G. Raju
Swiss Timing Ltd. v. Commonwealth Games 2010 Organising Committee
State of Bihar v. Bihar Rajya M.S.E.S.K.K. Mahasangh
Chandavarkar Sita Ratna Rao v. Ashalata S. Guram
ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Sidco Leathers Ltd.
Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President Madras Bar Association
Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. v. Tuff Drilling (P) Ltd.
S.B.P. & Company v. Patel Engineering Ltd.
Estralla Rubber v. Dass Estate (P) Ltd.
N.N. Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd.
Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. Dilip Construction Co.
Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements under Arbitration, 1996 & Stamp Act, 1899, In re
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.