SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 444

RANJAN GOGOI, R.BANUMATHI
Ameet Lalchand Shah – Appellant
Versus
Rishabh Enterprises – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Appellants : KAMINI JAISWAL, Adv.
For Respondents: AMRENDRA KUMAR MEHTA, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

R. Banumathi, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 17.04.2017 passed by the Delhi High Court in FAO(OS) (COMM) No.85 of 2017 in and by which the Division Bench affirmed the order of the Single Judge dismissing the application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the ‘Act’) by holding that the agreements between the parties are not inter-connected with the principal agreement dated 05.03.2012 and therefore, the parties cannot be referred to arbitration as per the decision in Sukanya Holdings (P) Ltd. v. Jayesh H. Pandya and another (2003) 5 SCC 531.

3. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are as follows:-

On 01.02.2012, the first respondent – Rishabh Enterprises (the ‘Rishabh’), the sole proprietorship concern of the second respondent – Dr. A.M. Singhvi entered into two agreements with M/s Juwi India Renewable Energies Pvt. Ltd. (Juwi India) namely:-

(i) Equipment and Material Supply Contract for purchase of power generating equipments to the tune of Rs.8,89,80,730/-; and

(ii) Engineering, Installation an































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top