Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 1841 (3.49 seconds)
Documents citing Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs Saw Pipes Ltd on 17 April, 2003

Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs M/S P.M. Electronics Ltd. on 26 February, 2020

In ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd. [(2003) 5 SCC 705 : AIR 2003 SC 2629] this Court after examining the grounds on which an award of the arbitrator can be set aside under Section 34 of the Act has said: (SCC p. 727, para 31) ''31. ... However, the award which is, on the face of it, patently in violation of statutory provisions cannot be said to be in public interest. Such award/judgment/decision is likely to adversely affect the administration of justice.
Allahabad High Court Cites 96 - Cited by 0 - S Agarwal - Full Document

Nirma Limited vs Slipco Constructions Private Limited on 12 August, 2025

In paragraph (19) of the judgment, this Court noted that the expansive interpretation given to "public policy of India" in the Saw Pipes (supra) and WesternGeco International Limited cases, which had been done away with, and a new ground of "patent illegality" was introduced which would apply to applications under Section 34 made on or after 23.10.2015. In paragraphs (36) and (37) of the judgment, this Court held that insofar as domestic awards are concerned, the additional ground of patent illegality was now available under sub-section (2A) to Section 34. However, re-appreciation of evidence was not permitted under the ground of "patent illegality"
Gujarat High Court Cites 52 - Cited by 0 - S Agarwal - Full Document

M/S Shree Forwarding Agency vs M/S Cement Corporation Of India Ltd. on 15 October, 2009

In my view the grounds of interference mentioned in Delhi Development Authority vs. R.S. Sharma and Company, New Delhi (supra) are identical to the grounds for interference mentioned in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Saw Pipes Ltd. (supra) and there has been no enlargement of scope of interference by the Apex Court or this Court in arbitral awards.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Manmohan - Full Document

M/S Shree Forwarding Agency vs M/S Cement Corporation Of India Ltd. on 15 October, 2009

In my view the grounds of interference mentioned in Delhi Development Authority vs. R.S. Sharma and Company, New Delhi (supra) are identical to the grounds for interference mentioned in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Saw Pipes Ltd. (supra) and there has been no enlargement of scope of interference by the Apex Court or this Court in arbitral awards.
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Manmohan - Full Document

The State Of Jharkhand vs M/S Alternative For India Development on 21 July, 2023

18. This Court, after considering the order passed by the court exercising the power under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 has found therefrom that the learned court has considered the fact in entirety as also has considered the scope of judicial review by taking note of the judgment rendered in the case of Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd. (Supra) which pertains to interference to be shown in a case of violation of public policy/perversity or if there is any error on the face of the 49 Award, but the learned court has not found any error on the face of the Award and the Award having not been found contrary to the public policy and does not suffer from the perversity, rather, the learned court, by taking note of the consideration so made by the learned Arbitrator, has given specific finding that the Award suffers from no error.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next