Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 181 (1.26 seconds)
Documents citing Pure Helium India Pvt. Ltd vs Oil & Natural Gas Commission on 9 October, 2003

Ennore Port Trust vs M/S.Hcc Van Oord Acz Joint Venture on 14 August, 2009

27. It was held in Pure Helium India (P) Ltd. v. Oil & Natural Gas Commission, [2003] 8 SCC 593, by quoting an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Khardah Co. Ltd. v. Raymon & Co. (India) (P) Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1810, that the construction of the terms of the contract is within the jurisdiction of the Arbitrators. The relevant portion is as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 80 - Cited by 0 - P Jyothimani - Full Document

The Braithwaite Burn And Jessop ... vs Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd (Rvnl) on 15 April, 2019

"112. It is trite that the terms of the contract can be express or implied. The conduct of the parties would also be a relevant factor in the matter of construction of a contract. The construction of the contract agreement is within the jurisdiction of the arbitrators having regard to the wide nature, scope and ambit of the arbitration agreement and they cannot be said to have misdirected themselves in passing the award by taking into consideration the conduct of the parties. It is also trite that correspondences exchanged by the parties are required to be taken into consideration for the purpose of construction of a contract. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for the arbitrator to determine, even if it gives rise to determination of a question of law. (See Pure Helium India (P) Ltd. v. Oil and Natural Gas Commission (2003) 8 SCC 593:
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 3 - S Narula - Full Document

Medirad Tech India Limited & Anr vs Technology Development Board on 2 May, 2019

"112. It is trite that the terms of the contract can be expressed or implied. The conduct of the parties would also be a relevant factor in the matter of construction of a contract. The construction of the contract agreement is within the jurisdiction of the arbitrators having regard to the wide nature, scope and ambit of the arbitration agreement and they cannot be said to have misdirected themselves in passing the award by taking into consideration the conduct of the parties. It is also trite that correspondences exchanged by the parties are required to be taken into consideration for the purpose of construction of a contract. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for the arbitrator to determine, even if it gives rise to determination of a question of law. [See Pure Helium India (P) Ltd. v. Oil and Natural Gas Commission, (2003) 8 SCC 593:2003 Supp (4) SCR 561 and D.D.Sharma v. Union of India.] (2004) 5 SCC 325.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - N Chawla - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next