Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (1.18 seconds)
Goyal Mg Gases Pvt Ltd vs Panama Infrastructure Developers Pvt ... on 29 March, 2023 cites

Chloro Controls(I) P.Ltd vs Severn Trent Water Purification Inc ... on 28 September, 2012

21. Explaining the legal basis that may be applied to bind a non- signatory to an arbitration agreement, this Court in Chloro Controls case [Chloro Controls India (P) Ltd. v. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., (2013) 1 SCC 641 : (2013) 1 SCC (Civ) 689] held thus : (SCC p. 694, paras 103.1, 103.2 & 105) "103.1. The first theory is that of implied consent, third-party beneficiaries, guarantors, assignment and other transfer mechanisms of contractual rights. This theory relies on the discernible intentions of the parties and, to a large extent, on good faith principle. They apply to private as well as public legal entities.
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 266 - S Kumar - Full Document

M/S. Sahyadri Earthmovers vs L & T Finance Ltd on 17 December, 2012

In Sahyadri Earthmovers v. L&T Finance Limited, 2011 (6) BomCR 393, the Bombay High Court considered an application filed whereby the petitioner had, inter alia, prayed for directions to be issued to the arbitral tribunal to "formulate and prescribe the appropriate legal procedure for adjudicating the arbitration proceedings and convening the arbitration meetings and more particularly to record the evidence as per the Indian Evidence Act". The said application was moved under Section 9 read with Section 19 of the Act, but was occasioned by an order passed by the arbitral tribunal on an application filed by the petitioner for determining the arbitral procedure. In the aforesaid context, the Court observed as under:
Bombay High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 25 - A V Mohta - Full Document
1