C. V. BHASKAR REDDY
East Hyderabad Expressway Limited Through its Authorised representative Mr. Shaik Masthan Bovine – Appellant
Versus
Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority – Respondent
ORDER :
This application, under Section 11(6)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Act”) is filed by the applicant seeking to intervene into the matter and appoint a nominee Arbitrator of Respondents to resolve the dispute.
2. The applicant is a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The respondent No.1 is a statutory body constituted under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975 and respondent No.2 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It is stated that respondent No.1 invited proposals under a single stage process from bidders and prescribed commercial terms and conditions for selection of a successful bidder vide Notice Inviting Proposal No.HGC/CGM(T)/ORR/6/2006-07 dated 22.02.2007 inter alia for “Design, Construction, Development, Finance, Operation and Maintenance of eight lane access controlled expressway under Phase IIA programme as an extension of Phase I of ORR to Hyderabad city, for the package from Pedda Amberpet to Bongulur from 95.00 KM to 108.00 KM on Build, Operation and Transfer (BOT) (Annuity) Basis” (for short “Project”). In response to the same, a consortium of (i)
Duro Felguera, S.A. v. Gangavaram Port Ltd.
IBI Consultancy (India) (P) Ltd. v. DSC Ltd.
Indian Oil Corporation and others v. Raja Transport Private Limited
North Eastern Railway and others vs. Tripple Engineering Works
Northern Railway Administration, Ministry of Railway, New Delhi v. Patel Engineering Company Limited
National Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Boghara Polyfab (P) Ltd.
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.