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

1995 Supreme(MP) 887

TEJ SHANKAR
Kamal Pushp Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
D. R. Construction Co. – Respondent


Advocates:
S.K. Sohani for petitioner; R.A. Roman for non-petitioner.

ORDER

1. This revision petition raises an important question of law with respect to the applicability of section 69 (3) of the Indian Partnership Act to the proceedings which arise out of a filing of an Award by the Arbitrator. Admittedly there was a contract with the petitioner by Gas Authority of India Ltd., Vijaypur, tahsil Raghogarh, district Guna (hereinafter referred to as GAIL) for horticulture work. After this agreement with the GAIL the petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent for carrying out the said work of horticulture in GAIL. A dispute had arisen between the petitioner, on one hand, and the respondent, on the other, and the matter was referred to sole arbitrator Shri Padam Kumar Jain, Advocate, Guna, with the consent of both the parties. The Arbitrator after recording necessary evidence and hearing parties passed an Award on 6.12.93 and submitted it on 2.2.94 before the District Judge, Guna, for making the Award rule of the Court. Notices u/s. 14 (2) of Arbitration Act were issued by the District Judge whereupon an objection was filed by the petitioner with respect to the maintainability of the Award on 28.4.94. He also challenged the legality of the



















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