HIGH COURT OF DELHI
VIBHU BAKHRU, SACHIN DATTA, JJ
GILLANDERS ARBUTHNOT AND CO LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. company filed appeal against judgment (Para 1) |
| 2. contract details and parties involved (Para 3) |
| 3. claim for damages and arbitration initiation (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. contention regarding limitation (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
JUDGMENT
VIBHU BAKHRU, J.
1. M/s Gillanders Arbuthnot and Co. Limited (hereafter GACL), a company incorporated under the Company Act, 1956 has filed the present appeal under Section 37(1)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the A&C Act) impugning a judgment dated 06.12.2023 (hereafter the impugned judgment) delivered by the learned Single Judge in O.M.P.(COMM) 269/2023 captioned Steel Authority of India Limited v. Beijing Sino Steel Industry and Trade Group Corporation, China and Ors., Respondent no.1 (hereafter SAIL) had preferred the said application [O.M.P.(COMM) 269/2023] under Section 34 of the A&C Act for setting aside an arbitral award dated 11.04.2023 (hereafter the impugned award) rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal (hereafter the Arbitral Tribunal) comprising of three members. The learned Single Judg
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.