Judgments - Arbitration
M/s. Zhejiang Bonly Elevator Guide Rail Manufacture Co. Ltd. VERSUS M/s. Jade Elevator Components
M/S SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED VERSUS RIOGLASS SOLAR SA
Samir Narain Bhojwani :Versus: M/s. Aurora Properties and Investments and Anr.
M/S KOHINOOR TRANSPORTERS Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Versus Hyundai Engineering and Construction Co. Ltd. & Ors.
M/S EMKAY GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. VERSUS GIRDHAR SONDHI
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA Versus GWALIOR JHANSI EXPRESSWAY LIMITED
MEIL Prasad (JV) Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
M/s Raveechee and Co. Versus Union of India
Union of India & Others vs. M/s. K. Kapoor & P.R. Mahant Khandwa
Law laid down - It is a mandatory requirement to file original or certified copy of the agreement alongwith the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for referring the matter for arbitration in a pending suit. Full Judgment
AMEET LALCHAND SHAH AND OTHERS Versus RISHABH ENTERPRISES AND ANOTHER
Shri Gouri Ganesh Shri Balaji Constructions “C” Class Contractor Vs. Executive Engineer, PWD
Law Laid Down - The expression “ascertained amount” appearing in Section 2(1)(d) of the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (for short “the State Act”) includes the amount of consequential relief. Mere declaration of termination of contract is not the substantial relief and in the guise of mere declaration an aggrieved person cannot be permitted to omit the consequential relief which the party may be entitled to claim in a reference under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. It is held that reading of Full Judgment