SHEKHAR B. SARAF
Jaypee Infratech Limited – Appellant
Versus
Ehbh Services Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
INDEX
| INDEX | |
| Serial No. | Contents |
| 1. | Facts |
| 2. | Question of Law |
| 3. | Contentions by the Applicant in ARBT No.2 of 2022 |
| 4. | Contentions by the Opposite Party in ARBT No.2 of 2022 |
| 5. | Analysis |
| 6. | Section 29-A: Genesis |
| 7. | Section 29-A: Defining the “Court” |
| 8. | Conflicting decision of this Court and reference to a Larger Bench |
| 9. | Principles |
| 10. | Conclusion and Directions |
1. These are applications filed under Section 29(A)(4) and Section 29(A) (5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), praying for the extension of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal in order to complete the arbitration proceedings.
2. Since Civil Misc. Arbitration Application No.2 of 2022 and Civil Misc. Arbitration Application No.5 of 2023 raise similar question of law, they are being taken up together.
FACTS
3. The factual matrix in ARBT 2 of 2022 has been delineated below :
Nimet Resources Inc. and Another v. Essar Steels Ltd.
A’Xykno Capital Services Private Limited v. State of U.P.
K. Balakrishna Rao v. Haji Abdulla Sait
Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and Others
Vanguard Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Fraser & Ross
SBP & Company v. M/s. Patel Engineering Company Ltd. and another
State of West Bengal v. Associated Contractors
State of Jharkhand v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd.
Lalitkumar V. Sanghavi (D) Through L.Rs. Neeta Lalit Kumar Sanghavi v. Dharamdas V. Sanghavi
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.