A.RAJASEKHAR REDDY
Shambhavi Estates, Ranga Reddy District – Appellant
Versus
M. Mohan Goud – Respondent
ORDER :
1. By way of this application filed under Section 11(5) and (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Act”), the applicant seeks for appointment of a retired Judge of this Court as an Arbitrator to settle the disputes among the applicant and respondent.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is a registered firm registered under the provisions of Indian Partnership Act, 1932 and is into the business of developing the properties by undertaking construction of flats or independent houses and also civil works of its clients. The respondent herein approached the applicant in the year 2006 stating that he is the absolute owner and possessor of Plot Nos. 51, 52, 57, 58 and 59 admeasuring 1,520 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 31/A and Plot Nos. 53, 54 and 55 admeasuring 546 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 31/EE and Plot No. 56 admeasuring 267 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 31/EE, total admeasuring 2,333 Sq. Yards situated at Manikonda Jagir Village and Gram Panchayat, Rajender Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District having purchased the same under Registered Document Nos. 1275/2002 dated 18.2.2002, 10918/2003 dated 30.8.2003 and 14295/2003 dated 13.11.2003 and offered the applicant fo
Booz-Allen and Hamilton Inc. vs. SBI Home Finance Ltd. and Others
M/s. Duro Felguera S.A. vs. M/s. Gangavaram Port Limited
M/s. Mayavati Trading Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pradyuat Bed Murman
S.B.P. and Co. vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. 2006 (1) ALD 10 (SC) : (2005) 8 SCC 618
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.