Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.25 seconds)Section 34 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Gayatri Balasamy vs M/S Isg Novasoft Technologies Limited on 1 October, 2021
The sheet
anchor of the argument of the respondents is the
judgment of the learned Single Judge in Gayatri
Balaswamy [Gayatri Balaswamy v. ISG
Novasoft Technologies Ltd., 2014 SCC OnLine
Mad 6568 : (2015) 1 Mad LJ 5] . This matter
arose out of a claim for damages by an employee
on account of sexual harassment at the
workplace. The learned Single Judge referred to
the power to modify or correct an award under
Section 15 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 in para 29
of the judgment. Thereafter, a number of
judgments of this Court were referred to in which
awards were modified by this Court, presumably
under the powers of this Court under Article 142
of the Constitution of India.
Mcdermott International Inc vs Burn Standard Co. Ltd. & Ors on 12 May, 2006
7 (2021) 9 SCC 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
26/39
O.S.A.No.341 of 2019
learned Single Judge referred to para 52 in
McDermott case [McDermott International Inc.
v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd., (2006) 11 SCC 181]
and then concluded that since the observations
made in the said para were not given in answer
to a pointed question as to whether the court had
the power under Section 34 to modify or vary an
award, this judgment cannot be said to have
settled the answer to the question raised finally.
..........
Khedut Sahakari Ginning & Pressing ... vs State Of Gujarat on 14 September, 1971
23. The first ground, on which, the arbitral award is interfered is that
the Arbitral Tribunal did not go into the nature of agreement as to whether it
is an agreement of sale or an agreement of agency/brokerage. In this regard,
it is to be seen that the plea relates to construction of the agreement. The
law relating to the same has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in Khedut Sahakari Ginning & Pressing Society Ltd. Vs. State of
Gujarat8. It is useful to extract the relevant paragraph of the said judgment
which reads as hereunder:-
Rohtas Industries Ltd. & Anr. Etc vs The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity ... on 2 March, 1984
" 5. Whether a particular agreement is an
agency agreement or an agreement of sale
depends upon the terms of the agreement. For
deciding that question, the terms of the
agreement have got to be examined. The true
nature of a transaction evidenced by a written
agreement has to be ascertained from the
covenants and not merely from what the parties
choose to call it. The terms of the agreement must
be carefully scrutinised in the light of the
surrounding circumstances — see the decision of
this Court in Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. State of
Bihar [12 STC 615] . In that decision, this Court
8 (1971) 3 SCC 480
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
32/39
O.S.A.No.341 of 2019
further held that for considering whether a
particular transaction is a sale or not, what the
court has to consider is whether as a result of the
transaction, the property in the goods passed to
the assessee in return for price and whether the
assessee sold those goods as its own. Bearing in
mind these principles, we shall now proceed to
examine the provisions of the Act as well as the
relevant bye-laws which take the place of
agreement between the parties. It is not the case
of the State that the society had in any manner
acted in contravention of the bye-laws. Therefore
all that we have to find out is the true effect of the
bye-laws."