Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MR. PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, MR. ALOK ARADHE
C. VELUSAMY – Appellant
Versus
K INDHERA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. question of law regarding court's powers after award. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's interpretation of jurisdiction and section 29a. (Para 2) |
| 3. factual background of arbitration agreement and proceedings. (Para 3) |
| 4. high court's dismissal of extension application due to nullity of award. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 5. arguments on the maintainability of application for extension post-award. (Para 6) |
| 6. principles of judicial oversight in arbitration proceedings. (Para 7) |
| 7. comparative framework of timelines under previous arbitration laws. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 8. law commission's recommendations on timely arbitration. (Para 10) |
| 9. clarification on section 29a provisions and implications. (Para 11) |
| 10. international perspectives on validity of late awards. (Para 12) |
| 11. interpretation of section 29a and its implications for arbitration. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 12. final conclusion on maintainability of extension applications. (Para 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT
I. Question of Law
Whether a Court can entertain an application under Section 29A (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to extend the mandate of the arbitrator(s) for making the award even after an ‘award’ is rendered,
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
