Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
India Cements Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Zuari Cement Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the arbitration dispute involving two companies for share acquisition and marketing services. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. challenge to the arbitral award under section 34 of the arbitration and conciliation act. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. contentions regarding evidence admissibility and the validity of the contract under company law. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. framing of key legal questions regarding evidence act applicability and section 77 of the companies act. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. applicability of evidence act sections 91/92 in arbitration and scope of court interference. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. compliance with section 77 of the companies act and limitations of judicial review under section 34/37. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
1.The Original Side Appeal is filed challenging the order dated17.09.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.674/2011.
2.Facts:
The appellant/India Cements Limited (hereinafter referred to as ICL) initiated the arbitration proceedings by invoking clause 13.2 of the marketing a
The main legal point established is the requirement for arbitral awards to be reasoned and based on credible evidence, and the court's limited scope of interference with arbitral awards.
The court reaffirmed the limited scope of judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing that courts cannot reappraise evidence or in....
Important Point:a) Scope and ambit of challenge to the award declared by the learned Arbitral tribunal in an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is very limited. Only when the award i....
The court upheld the specific performance of the share purchase agreement, emphasizing the enforceability of such contracts under the Specific Relief Act and the Sale of Goods Act. The court also rej....
The court upheld the limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, affirming the arbitrator's findings on readiness and willingness, and the award of compens....
The Group of Companies Doctrine can be invoked to bind a non-signatory party to an arbitration agreement if there is a mutual intent of the parties, a direct relationship between the party which is a....
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
