Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.37 seconds)
National Highways Authority Of India vs Som Datt Builders-Ncc-Nec (Jv) And Ors. on 29 August, 2007 cites

Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd vs Saw Pipes Ltd on 17 April, 2003

23. The aspect which also cannot be lost sight of is that this is the interpretation arrived at by the Dispute Review Board as also by the Arbitral Tribunal. It is trite to say that this Court does not sit as a Court of appeal over the decision of an Arbitral Tribunal even within the expanded scope of scrutiny of an award as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd. AIR 2003 SC 2629 where it has been observed that a contract has to be interpreted by the arbitrator, who is a chosen judge by the parties. So long as the view of the arbitrators is a plausible view, though may not be the only possible view, no interference is called for by the Court. Of course, the Court is not without jurisdiction to interfere where the view taken by the arbitrator is so absurd that no reasonable person would have come to the said view.
Supreme Court of India Cites 78 - Cited by 1413 - Full Document

Mcdermott International Inc vs Burn Standard Co. Ltd. & Ors on 12 May, 2006

In the said case the Supreme Court has also observed that the illegality must go to the root of the matter and if the illegality is of a trivial nature, it cannot be held that the award is against the public policy and the award could also be set aside if it is so unfair and unreasonable that it shocks the conscience of the Court as observed in Mcdermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and Ors. 2006 (2) Arb. LR 498.
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 1325 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Food Corporation Of India vs Joginderpal Mohinderpal on 3 March, 1989

24. The legal position has, in fact, not changed to this extent on the Arbitration Act, 1940 since even under the earlier Act a closer scrutiny of merits of documents and materials on record was found to be untenable. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for the Arbitral Tribunal to determine. This view is supported by a number of judgments of the Apex Court including in Food Corporation of India v. Joginderpal Mohinderpal and Anr. (1989) 2 SCC 347; Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. Unique Erectors (Gujarat) (P) Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1989 SC 973 and Sudarsan Trading Co. v. Govt of Kerala AIR 1989 SC 890.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 182 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board vs Unique Erectors (Gujarat) (P) Ltd. & Anr on 24 January, 1989

24. The legal position has, in fact, not changed to this extent on the Arbitration Act, 1940 since even under the earlier Act a closer scrutiny of merits of documents and materials on record was found to be untenable. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for the Arbitral Tribunal to determine. This view is supported by a number of judgments of the Apex Court including in Food Corporation of India v. Joginderpal Mohinderpal and Anr. (1989) 2 SCC 347; Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. Unique Erectors (Gujarat) (P) Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1989 SC 973 and Sudarsan Trading Co. v. Govt of Kerala AIR 1989 SC 890.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 288 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Sudarsan Trading Co vs Govt. Of Kerala & Anr on 14 February, 1989

24. The legal position has, in fact, not changed to this extent on the Arbitration Act, 1940 since even under the earlier Act a closer scrutiny of merits of documents and materials on record was found to be untenable. Interpretation of a contract is a matter for the Arbitral Tribunal to determine. This view is supported by a number of judgments of the Apex Court including in Food Corporation of India v. Joginderpal Mohinderpal and Anr. (1989) 2 SCC 347; Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. Unique Erectors (Gujarat) (P) Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1989 SC 973 and Sudarsan Trading Co. v. Govt of Kerala AIR 1989 SC 890.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 613 - S Mukharji - Full Document
1