- Home >>
- Details
| Information Type: | Judicial Information |
| Court: | Supreme Court |
| Date of Judgment(s): | 2011-02-03 |
| Case No: | 1282 of 2011 |
| Case Type: | Appeal (Civil) |
| Judge Name: | R.V. Raveendran & A.K. Patnaik |
| Subject: | Civil Law |
| Statutes / Acts: | Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 |
| Section: | 11 |
| Bench Strength: | Double Bench |
| Advocate: | Goolam E. Vahanvati, AG, Rakesh Sawhney, Mona Aneja et. al (P) & Arvind Minocha (R) |
| State of Appellant(s): | Delhi |
| History of Case No: | udgment and Order dated 08.12.2009 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in A. A. No. 288 of 2009 |
|
Equal Citation Details : (SCSuppl)2011(4)CHN126, 112(2011)CLT67, (2011)2CompLJ19(SC), 2011(2)CTC317, 2011(4)MhLJ10(SC), (2011)4MLJ174(SC), 2011(3)RCR(Civil)335, 2011(2)SCALE291, (2011)3SCC507, [2011]2SCR512, AIR2011SC987, 2011(1)ARBLR373(SC), 2011 2 AWC1884SC |
|
|
Case Note / Description : In view of the foregoing, this appeal is allowed and the order of the Designate is set aside. The application under section 11 of the Act filed by appellant before the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court is allowed and Justice P.K.Bahri (Retd.) who was the earlier Arbitrator is appointed as the sole arbitrator to decide the appellant’s claim in regard to the additional cost for completing the work. It is open to the respondent to raise all contentions against the claim of the appellant including the contention of limitation, maintainability and res judicata, before the arbitrator. Nothing in this order shall be construed as expression of any opinion on the merits or tenability of the claim of the appellant regarding extra cost.
|
|
Raj Kumar (Ph.D Research Scholar)
Dr. M. Madhusudhan (Supervisor)
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
II Floor, Tutorial Building, University of Delhi , Delhi-110 007
Mobile : +91-011-27666656
Email : info@olisindia.in