Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (4.06 seconds)Section 16 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Sps Engineering Ltd. vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. on 30 July, 2004
(i) SPS Engineering Ltd. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., 113
(2004) DLT 70, Paras 8 to 10
OMP No.981/2012 Page 14 of 23
In this case IOCL issued a SCN that the petitioner
be put in holiday list and be barred from future
contracts with IOCL. The petitioner replied and
stated that all disputes should be referred to
arbitration, to which IOCL declined on the ground
that blacklisting is a non-contractual matter. The
petitioner had invoked the arbitration prior to the SCN
and it moved the court for appointment of arbitrator.
National Building Construction ... vs New Delhi Municipal Council And Anr. on 27 November, 2006
(ii) National Building Construction Corporation Vs. NDMC, 138
(2007) DLT 414. Relevant para 25
Where arbitration is pending in respect of those
very charges for which the person is ought to be
blacklisted then the authority should await the
conclusions and determination by the arbitrator.
In this case disputes were pending before the
arbitrator. Nevertheless NDMC issued a show-cause
and passed an order debarring petitioner for five
years. Court held relying on IOCL judgment above,
that NDMC acted in haste in issuing the blacklisting
order when arbitration was pending on the same
allegations. It held that it was necessary for NDMC to
await conclusion of the arbitration proceedings and
the blacklisting order is therefore arbitrary.
Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited & Anr vs M/S Verma Transport Company on 8 August, 2006
(iii) Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited vs. Verma Transport, (2006) 7
SCC 275. Relevant para 43, page 30 of JPB and para 47
Once it is found that the dispute arose out of the
contract, Section 8 of the Arbitration Act would be
attracted. In this case court held that the illegal
termination of contract and blacklisting are the cause
of action arising out of the contract. It further held
that the question in regard to jurisdiction of arbitrator
can be determined by the arbitrator himself in terms of
Section 16 of the Act.