Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Patel Engineering Company Ltd. Vs. Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd.

Decided On : Apr-29-2009

Court : Mumbai

LAW: Section 34, Section 11, the Arbitration Act, Section 34 of the Act, Section 34 of the Act, Section 34, Section 34, the Notice of Motion, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, the Notice of Motion, Notice of Motion, the Notice of Motion, the Notice of Motion, Section 34 of the Act, Section 28(3, the Arbitration Act, Section 34, Section 75 or Section 81.14, Section 34, the Arbitration Act, Section 34, Section 34, Section 34, Order 6 Rule 2 CPC, Order 6 Rule 4, Section 83(1)(a, Order 6 Rules 2, Order 6 Rule 4, Order 6 Rule 2 CPC, Section 30, Article 158 of the Limitation Act, Section 30, Section 17, Section 30, Article 158 of the Limitation Act, Article 158, Section 30, the Section 34 of the 1940 Act, Section 30, Section 34, the Arbitration Act, Section 28(3, the Arbitration Act, Section 11, the Arbitration Act, the Arbitration Act, Section 11, Section 11, Section 11(6, Section 11(6, Section 63, Section 63

ORG: D.K. Deshmukh, this Court in Arbitration Petition No, Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, Patel Engineering Company Ltd., Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., Special Conditions, the General Instructions, the General Conditions of Contract, the General Conditions of Contract, Court, Court, Arbitral, The Arbitration Petition, Appeal, Arbitrators, Arbitrators, Claimant, Respondents, Respondents, the Arbitration Petition, Petition, P.P. Mulchandani, Court, Vastu Invest & Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat Lease Financing Ltd., the Original Side Rules, Court, Arbitration Petition, the Notice of Motion, unsustainable.10, Court, Court, Court, Court, Counsel for the Respondent, Court, Procedural Rules, the High Court, Court, Court, Court, Court, Court, Court, Court, Court, Notice of Motion, Court, Court, Petitioners, Notice of Motion No, Notice of Motion No, Notice of Motion No, Notice of Motion, Notice of Motion, Notice of Motion, The Arbitral Tribunal, the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, Arbitrators, Arbitrators, the Special Conditions of Contract, KRCL, KRCL, Court, Court, Court, Court, Arbitration Agreement, Court, the Petition the Petitioner, the Supreme Court, The Supreme Court, The High Court, CPC, CPC, Court, CPC, Court, Hastimal, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Learned Counsel, Saha & Co., the Court of suo motu, Court, Arbitrators, Corporation, Claimant, Claimant, Arbitrators, Clause 28.6, Arbitrators, Counsel, Arbitrators, clause.20, Arbitrators, The Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, p, & r of, the Arbitration Petition, Arbitral, Appellant, Board, Board, Arbitrators, Respondents, Appellant, Arbitrators, Arbitrators, Appeal, Cross-Appeal Now, Corporation, Corporation, Corporation, Corporation, Corporation, Court, the Supreme Court, Datar Switchgear Ltd., Tata Finance Ltd., the Supreme Court, Counsel for the Appellant, the Supreme Court, Datar Switchgears Ltd., Counsel, Appellant, Clause 28.10, Clauses 28.10.2.1 & 28.10.2.2, Arbitrators, Arbitrators, the General Conditions of Contract, the Supreme Court, Board of Trustees for Port of Calcutta v. Engineers-De-Space-Age :, the Supreme Court, Appeal

NORP: J.1

DATE: 19th August, 2004, 2003, 1996, 19th May, 2003, November, 1991, 29th October, 1991, 28th April, 1994, 30th September, 1995, 14th March, 1996, 10th March, 1st July, 1998, 1998, 24th December, 1998 two, 8th October, 2002, 19th May, 2003, 2003, 8th October, 2002, 19th August, 2004, 2002, 1734 of 2004, 1734 of 2004, 2001, 1734 of 2004, 1734 of 2004, 1951, 1996, 30 days, more than 30 days, more than 30 days, the scheme of 1996 Act, a later date, '20, 4th May, 1994, 42.16.5.1, 63, 24th December, 1998, 63, 2000)8SCC151, under Section 63, June, 1994, 1st July, 1994, 1st July, 1994, 16th March, 1995

CARDINAL: 493, 6,81,02,517/-, 5, 1996.4, 321, two, 493, 1, 2, 5, 10, 1, 5, 7, 7.5, 2.7, 460, 8, 6, 12, 102.60, 61.28, 7, 7, 2001)1BOMLR169, 246, 803(C, 1, 10, 1, 5, 1, 2, 2)(d, 7, 112, 113, 114, 113, 114, 74, two, 1, 10, 1, 1, 42.1, 2, 3).(2, 803C(a, one, 13, 4, 29)The, two, one, one, 1967]3SCR147, 8, 10, two, 7, 2, 2, 2.5, 2, 100, 28.6, 2, 28.6, 2, 2, 2, 28.6, 2, 2.5, 28.6, 86, 2.5, 22, 2.5, 2, 215, 245.10, 406.47, 507, 406.47, 507, 245.10, 90, 10The, three, 10, 1, 66, 68, 1, 13,60,500/-, 1, 2, 1, more than one, more than three, three, one, three, two, two, two, 63.35, two

FAC: the Appellant-Patel Engineering Co. Ltd.

PERCENT: 18%, 18%, about 90%, only 90%, 10%, 10%, 5 to 10%, between 5% to 10%, 10%, 90%, 90%, 10%, 14%, 25%, 18%, 18%

PRODUCT: Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Appellant, Respondent, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Respondent, Appellant, under:112, LJ Soft, Respondent, Act suo-motu, Respondent, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Respondent, Appellant, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Appellant, Appellant, Respondent, Appellant, Respondent, Respondent

LOC: Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent, Respondent

GPE: p.a., Cub.meterRs, Cub.meterRs, that:(i, that:(i, India, India, India, R.A., contract.30, concerned.33, p.a., p.a.

PERSON: Claimant, Appellant, Appellant, R. Tahiliani, Supp, Award, Award, Paragraphs 112, Chinoy, Petitioner, N. Mulchandani, R. Tahiliani, DG, Recourse, Award, Bijendra Nath v. Mayank Srivastava, Abdool Hoosein, Zenail Abadin v., Charles Agnew Turner, Hiralal Motichand, Madan Lal v. Sunder Lal, Madan Lal, limitation.10, suo motu, Hiralal Motichand, Ishar Singh, suo motu, suo motu, suo motu, suo motu, Formula, Appellant, Award, Chinoy, Bijendra Nath Srivastava, Bijendra Nath, cubic meter, cubic meter, cubic meter, cubic meter, cubic meter, liable.27, Bills Nos, Anr

QUANTITY: 15,127.00 Cubic meters, 3,952.74 Cubic meters, 11,175.84 Cubic meters, 3,952.74 Cubic meters @ Rs, Cubic meter

ORDINAL: first, first, third

WORK_OF_ART: Hastimal Dalichand v., Hastimal Dalichand Bora v.

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //