Preview

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. vs. M/S. L.K. Ahuja & Co.

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2748 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. vs. M/S. L.K. Ahuja & Co.
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. vs. M/s. L.K. Ahuja & Co.
In respect of certain contracts of work assigned by the appellant certain disputes having been arisen, the matter was referred to arbitration. Two awards were made and the same were filed in the court of the Civil Judge in two Title (Arbitration) Suits Nos. 37/86 and 40/86. By a common order, the trial court made the awards rule of court in entirety and decrees were drawn in terms thereof. An appeal was filed against the said common order before the High Court. The High Court having dismissed the said appeal, the matter was carried to the Supreme Court.
Facts:
1. Two works were assigned by the appellant for construction of 108 and 72 units of B Type quarters at Karmik Nagar, Dhanbad pursuant to a tender notice dated 4/13.7.1981. 2. After certain negotiations between the parties, two work orders were issued by the appellant to the respondent on certain terms and conditions mentioned therein valuing at Rs.86,49,730/- and Rs.57,64,368/- for the said two works on 14.3.1982 and two separate agreements were executed by the parties. 3. The schedule dates for completion of the respective works were fixed as 24.3.1983 and 19.3.1983. 4. The respondent sought for extension of time which was granted by the appellant. 5. Disputes having arisen between the parties, the matter was referred to the sole arbitrator, Shri M.P.Sharma, the then Additional Chief Engineer. 6. The arbitrator made two awards in respect of the two contracts on 14.5.1989, which were filed in the court of the Civil Judge on 12.6.1990 in two Title [Arbitration] Suits Nos. 37/86 and 40/86. 7. Arbitrator asks both parties to file certain joint statements showing the quantities, rates and the payments made for various items and balance payment due to the claimant under various heads and other particulars on 26.4.89. 8. The arbitrator noticed in the course of his award that the joint statement signed by both the parties is

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case Reviewed George L. Riggs, Inc. v. CIR., 64 TC 474 (1975), acq. 1976-2 C.B. 2.…

    • 565 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    law case

    • 427 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The purpose of this arbitration paper is written for arbitration meeting conducted on April 4th 2014 for the incident happened in February 15th.…

    • 427 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    WHEREAS, the Parties agree that this Agreement reflects a settlement of disputed and contested matters and that no Party admits any liability or responsibility for any act or omission by the execution of this Agreement; and…

    • 448 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hollis Vs Vabu Essay

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages

    joint judgment, reached this conclusion on the basis that the courier was an employee. As…

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Claimant Case Summary

    • 124 Words
    • 1 Page

    First, since Claimant did not pay the registration fee in full and Mr. Fasttrack’s power of attorney was granted by wright holding instead of wright ltd., the request for arbitration filed by Claimant on 31 May 2016 was not complying with the requirements of article 4.1 the CAM-CCBC rules. Second, Claimant's initiation to the arbitration has occurred six days after the expiration of the agreed sixty-days’ time limit, as according to the arbitration clause, the last day parties could initiate to arbitration was 31 May 2016, and amended and valid request for arbitration was submitted…

    • 124 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Arbitration

    • 2575 Words
    • 11 Pages

    According to the topic of this assignment, I also agree that although arbitration was introduced for settling dispute but it is not serving it purpose entirely and precisely. Now I’m going to discuss about the reasons which are making difficulty for arbitration to serve its purpose completely.…

    • 2575 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The case pertains to Claim for refund of service tax paid by the Assessee who found that he was not accountable to pay tax in light of Circular No. 80/10/2004, dated 17-9-2004 since it constructed civil structures which…

    • 927 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    case studies

    • 8117 Words
    • 33 Pages

    1. This is a reference at the instance of the applicants referring certain questions to the High Court for decision.…

    • 8117 Words
    • 33 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Li CJ, Bokhary and Chan PJJ, Nazareth and Sir Anthony Mason NPJJ 21–23 May and 20 July 2001…

    • 4554 Words
    • 19 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mark Koding

    • 876 Words
    • 3 Pages

    b. On the application by the defence, the judge in High Court referred the matter to Federal Court. The case was stated as a special case and remitted to Federal Court under sections 48 and 49 of the Courts of Judicature Act 7 of 1964 (Revised 1972), Act 91.…

    • 876 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In this case, the validity of 24th, 25th and 29th amendments to the Constitution of India…

    • 243478 Words
    • 974 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Arbitration Act

    • 65942 Words
    • 264 Pages

    The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 enacted in 1996 is an Act to consolidate and…

    • 65942 Words
    • 264 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Shamrao Case Study

    • 758 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Respondent no. 01 resisted the petition by filing written say (Exh.No.10). He denied all adverse contentions. It is specifically denied that respondent no. 01 was working as his employee. In additional written say, it is pleaded that respondent no. 01 has given contract of digging well in his field to respondent no. 02 on 03/05/2011 for Rs.2,55,000/-. Respondent no. 02 has accepted Rs.2,55,000/- and agreed responsibility of the accident, if any, occured while digging the well. Respondent no. 02 employed deceased Shamrao and other employees as labour for digging the well. Hence, respondent no. 01 is not liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. There are relations between the deceased Shamrao and respondent no. 02 as servant and master. Hence, the petitioners have right to claim compensation from respondent no. 02. However, the petitioners have unnecessarily involved respondent no. 01 in the present matter. Due to which, respondent no. 01 is facing heart problems. He expanded Rs.3,00,000/- for treatment and spending his remaining life in a very critical condition. Ultimately, respondent no. 01 prayed to reject the petition with costs and compensatory costs of…

    • 758 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Subsequently, the Indian government adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law in 1996 and incorporated provisions of the Convention to enact the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”). Currently, the Act stands amended by the Amendment Act of 2015 (“2015 Amendment” or “Amendment Act”), which incorporated most of the Law Commission’s recommendations in its 246th Report on “Amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996” (“Law Commission Recommendations” or “Law Commission Report”) for reshaping Indian arbitration jurisprudence. The 2015 Amendment, in the author’s opinion, is a large leap forward towards making India an arbitration-friendly…

    • 1642 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    JCT 11 SBC/Q, Article 7, any dispute arises under contract, Modern Contractors may refer to adjudication in accordance with clause 9.2. As per adjudication cases employer is a residential occupier within the meaning of section 106 of the Housing Grants. Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Section 9-Settlement of Disputes under Clause 9.2, scheme the Adjudicator shall be the person and nominating body shall be stated in the Contract Particular. Sets out right to adjudication and the administration of adjudication in compliance with the HGCR Act 1996.…

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays