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

2019 Supreme(SC) 1385

N.V.RAMANA, MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR, AJAY RASTOGI
Dyna Technologies Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Crompton Greaves Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Diksha Rai, Renu Gupta, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Ashok Kumar Jain, Pankaj Jain, Amit Kasera, Bijoy Kumar Jain, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

N. V. RAMANA, J.

1. The question involved herein revolves around the requirement of reasoned award and the cautionary tale for the parties and arbitrators to have a clear award, rather than to have an award which is muddled in form and implied in its content, which inevitably leads to wastage of time and resources of the parties to get clarity, and in some cases, frustrate the very reason for going for an arbitration.

2. This appeal is filed against the final order and judgment dated 27.04.2007, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent and set aside the award of Arbitral Tribunal relating to claim no. 2 for payment of compensation for the losses suffered due to unproductive use of machineries.

3. Brief facts of the case are that a contract was entered into between DCM Shriram Aqua Foods Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘DCM’ in short) and M/s. Crompton Greaves Limited (hereinafter referred to as “CGL” in short) for an aquaculture unit to be set up by such Principal, namely, DCM. CGL invit


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