Advanced Search Results

Klassic Construction (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Society Registration Act, 1860

Reported in : AIR2006SC2430; 2006(2)ARBLR432(SC); JT2006(7)SC231; 2006(6)SCALE325; (2006)9SCC688

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar,; Anurag Kumar and; Rishi Kesh, Advs

1. Heard Mr. P.N. Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Arvind Kumar Tewari, learned Counsel for the respondent. The appellant before us is a contractor. The respondent is the Army Welfare Housing Organisation represented...

Housing and Urban Development Corporation Vs. Dsa Engineers (Bombay) a ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 14, 30 and 32; Arbitration (Amendment) Act, 1996 - Sections 4, 10 and 34; Arbitration (Amendment) Act, 1985 - Sections 85, 85(1) and 85(2); Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937; Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961; Contract Act - Sections 28; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 7

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT656

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar and Anurag Kumar, Advs

J.D. Kapoor, J.1. This petition under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for filing of the award dated 30.6.2001 has been thrown up interesting question of law - whether the provisions of Act of 1940...

S. Nagaraja and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 131, 226 and 262; ;Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956 - Sections 4 and 5; River Boards Act, 1956 - Sections 4(4)

Reported in : 2003(2)KarLJ88

Advocate for Appellant : S.P. Shankar and ;A.N. Hegde, Advs.

ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The prayers sought for in this writ petition are.--(a) To declare the Inter Water Dispute Act, 1956 and the River Boards Act, 1956 are void and unconstitutional, the legislation traversing beyond Article...

Supreme Court Advocates-on-record Association and Another Vs. Union of ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 12, 14, 21, 32, 39-A, 50, 51, 53, 73, 74, 103, 112(3), 113(1), 121, 124(2), 125, 127, 128, 129, 130, 137, 139(A), 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 154(1), 163, 166(3), 167, 169, 202(3), 211, 214, 215, 216, 217(1), 221(2) 222, 224, 226, 229(2) 231(2), 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 280, 316(1), 320, 324, 338(5), 344(1), 350-B and 356; Government of India Act, 1919 - Sections 101; Government of India Act, 1935 - Sections 200(2) and 220(2); New Towns Act, 1966; Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 1977; High Courts Act, 1861; Government of India Act, 1915 - Sections 101 and 102; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 40 - Order 46, Rule 1; Madras District Municipalities Act, 1920 - Sections 3; Constitution (Forth-Fourth) Amendment Act, 1978 - Article 22;

Reported in : AIR1994SC268; JT1993(5)SC497; (1993)4SCC441; [1993]Supp2SCR659

Advocate for Appellant : Malin K. Benerjee, Attorney General,; Kapil Sibal,; F.S. Narima

ORDERJ.S. Verma, J.(for himself and on behalf of Yogeshwar Dayal, G.N. Ray, Dr. A.S. Anand & S.P. Bharucha, JJ.) :1. By and Order dated October 26,1990 passed in Subhash Sharma and Ors. and Anr. Union of...

Carborundum Universal Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delh ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 220(2A); Constitution of India - Article 136

Reported in : (1990)1CompLJ219(SC); (1989)80CTR(SC)85; 1989(25)LC466(SC); [1989]180ITR171(SC); JT1989(4)SC56; 1989(2)SCALE799; 1989Supp(2)SCC462; 1990(1)LC90(SC)

ORDER1. These two applications under Article 136 of the Constitution are directed against two separate orders made by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and communicated on 2nd March, 1987, declining to waive the demand of...

Standard Corrosion Controls Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sarku Engineering Services S ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11, 11(2), 11(5) and 11(6); Companies Act; Arbitration Rules; Contract Act; Limitation Act; Specific Relief Act

Reported in : AIR2009SC1138; 2009(1)ALT47(SC); 2008(4)ARBLR529(SC); 2009(1)AWC993(SC); 2009(1)BomCR68; (2009)1SCC303:2009(1)LHSC254:2009AIRSCW350

Advocate for Appellant : Anurag Kumar,; P.N. Kumar,; Bindra Rana and;

Markandey Katju, J.1. By means of this Arbitration Application the applicant has prayed for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for resolution...

Vilayatiram Mital Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 20

Reported in : 1980RLR312

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar and; Rekha Sharma, Advs

D.K. Kapur, J.(1) [PETITIONER Constructed a Govt. hospital which was Completed on 25.4.75. Some deductions were made from his running bill, and in last bill of 18-9-76, a sum of Rs. 5171.11 was demanded from him....

Arm Construction Co. Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 20

Reported in : 1980RLR307

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar,; S.R. Yadav,; Kadambani and;

Sultan Singh, J.(1) [PETITIONER contracted with Railway for constructing a certain building. Work was completed on 20.9.76. Petitioner was allowed payment of final bill only after he had given 'No claim Certificate' under clause 43 (2)...

Kidar Nath Sharma Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 14, 17, 30 and 33

Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)601

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar, Adv

V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. The petitioner, Kidar Nath Sharma, is a contractor. He has filed the present petition under Section 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act praying for the award of the arbitration to be...

Pushpa Kapa Vs. Sfflv Kumar

Court : Delhi

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 24

Reported in : 35(1988)DLT187; 1988RLR434

Advocate for Appellant : P.N. Kumar and; J.N. Verma, Advs

Jagdish Chandra, J. (1) In this suit for possession and damages for use and occupation of the property in suit the entire evidence was recorded and concluded and the suit was set for final hearing. Instead...