Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. Karthikeyan, K.Kumaresh Babu, JJ
K.Latha – Appellant
Versus
P.Ravichandran – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of development agreement disputes and arbitration invocation. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. appellants challenge arbitrator's evidence consideration and award directions. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. respondents defend limited scope of section 34 interference. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court upholds award; no re-appreciation absent patent illegality. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 19.08.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the Arbitral Award dated 28.06.2017 was upheld. By the said award, the learned Arbitrator allowed the claim of the respondent and rejected the counter claim of the appellants.
2) The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the first respondent is engaged in real estate development, whereas the appellants are the owners of the subject property. The parties entered into a development agreement dated 21.02.2012, whereby it was agreed that the developed property would be shared in the ratio of 60% to the appellants and 40% to the first respondent. According to the first respondent, one Kamalanathan, who represented the appellants, caused delay and obstruction in the completion of the project, resul
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
