Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 87 (1.83 seconds)
Documents citing Pravin Electricals Pvt. Ltd vs Galaxy Infra And Engineering Pvt. Ltd. on 8 March, 2021

Kumar Sachin vs Manoj Kumar Sahu on 16 June, 2022

19. This Court, after considering both the judgments, i.e., Pravin Electricals Private Limited Vs. Galaxy Infra 30 and Engineering Private Limited (supra) and Vidya Drolia & Ors Vs. Durga Trading Corporation (supra) and looking to the factual aspect of the case in hand, is of the considered view that the instant application is not deserved to be considered at this stage for the following reasons:
Jharkhand High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

Mr. Dushyant Chikara vs Fauzia Sultana & Anr on 12 February, 2024

20. I consider that though the FSL reports are there to say that the signatures of Sh. S. K. Zaman on documents are forged and fabricated. At the same time, the petitioner is also relying upon an expert report to say that signatures are not forged. In any case, it requires adjudication from a competent Court of law. At best, at this stage, both the parties are relying upon their reports. There has to be a finding on the record to authenticate the same. I consider that the view taken by the Bombay High Court seems to be a plausible one and particularly in view of Parveen Electricals Private Limited v. Galaxy Infra and Engineering Private Limited (supra) and Cox and Kings Limited v. SAP India Private Limited (supra)
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - D K Sharma - Full Document

Omega Finvest Llp vs Direct News Private Limited on 11 October, 2022

Ltd., (2018) 17 SCC 607 : (2019) 2 SCC (Civ) 530] is important in that what was specifically under consideration was an arbitration clause which would get activated only if an insurer admits or accepts liability. Since on facts it was found that the insurer repudiated the claim, though an arbitration clause did "exist", so to speak, in the policy, it would not exist in law, as was held in that judgment, when one important fact is introduced, namely, that the insurer has not admitted or accepted liability. Likewise, in the facts of the present case, it is clear that the arbitration clause that is contained in the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ASHEESH KUMAR YADAV ARB.P. 818/2021 Page 35 Signing Date:14.10.2022 10:53:19 sub-contract would not "exist" as a matter of law until the sub-contract is duly stamped, as has been held by us above. The argument that Section 11(6-A) deals with "existence", as opposed to Section 8, Section 16 and Section 45, which deal with "validity" of an arbitration agreement is answered by this Court's understanding of the expression "existence" in Hyundai Engg. case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Hyundai Engg. & Construction Co. Ltd., (2018) 17 SCC 607 : (2019) 2 SCC (Civ) 530] , as followed by us."
Delhi High Court Cites 54 - Cited by 1 - V K Rao - Full Document

Rathi Steel And Power Limited vs Raj Lime Products on 6 May, 2022

In Patel Engineering Ltd. & Ors. (supra), it was observed by 7 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court that once matter reaches arbitral Tribunal or sole arbitrator, High Court would not (Downloaded on 07/05/2022 at 08:30:00 PM) (6 of 9) [CW-3358/2022] interfere with the orders passed by Arbitrator or arbitral Tribunal during the course of arbitration proceedings and parties can approach the Court only in terms of Section Section 37 or in terms of Section 34 of the Act. That apart, the Court also held:
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - V Bishnoi - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next