Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.21 seconds)Section 3 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Foreign Awards (Recognition And Enforcement) Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Arbitration Act, 1940
Renusagar Power Company Ltd vs General Electric Company And Anr on 16 August, 1984
In Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. vs. General Electric
Company [1984 (4) SCC 679], this Court considered the scope
of section 3 of Foreign Awards Act and formulated the following
six conditions required to be fulfilled for invoking section 3 :-
Article 1 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd vs Indure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors on 9 February, 1996
In U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. vs. Indure Pvt.
Ltd. [1996 (2) SCC 667] negativing a contention based on
acquiescence in matters concerning challenge to arbitrability,
this Court observed thus :-
Section 34 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
M/S Rickmers Verwaltung Gmb H vs The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 19 November, 1998
"From a careful perusal of the entire correspondence on
the record, we are of the opinion that no concluded
bargain had been reached between the parties as the
terms of the standby letter of credit and performance
guarantee were not accepted by the respective parties. In
the absence of acceptance of the standby letter of credit
and performance guarantee by the parties, no
enforceable agreement could be said to have come into
existence. The correspondence exchanged between the
parties shows that there is nothing expressly agreed
between the parties and no concluded enforceable and
binding agreement come into existence between them.
Apart from the correspondence relied upon by the
learned single Judge of the High Court, the Fax messages
exchanged between the parties, referred to above, go to
show that the parties were only negotiating and had not
arrived at any agreement. There is a vast difference
between negotiating a bargain and entering into a
binding contract. After negotiation of bargain in the
present case, the stage never reached when the
negotiations were completed giving rise to a
binding contract. The learned single Judge of the
High Court was, therefore, perfectly justified in
holding that Clause 53 of the Charter Party relating
to Arbitration had no existence in the eye of law,
because no concluded and binding contract ever
came into existence between the parties."