Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.87 seconds)The Companies Act, 1956
Section 73 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940
M/S. Kailash Nath Associates vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr on 9 January, 2015
191. Likewise, it has been held in the Case of Maula Bux vs. Union of
India(1969) 2 SCC 554., and Kailash Nath Associates vs. Delhi
Development Authority, (2015) 4 SCC 136 that proof of loss or damage
arising out of breach of contract is a sine qua non for payment of
compensation.
Section 80 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Hind Construction Contractors By Its ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 30 January, 1979
172. The Apex Court in its decision in Hind
Contractors v. State of Maharashtra, (1979) 2 SCC 70, held that
whether the time is the essence of the Contract would essentially be a
question of the intention of the parties to be gathered
from the terms of the Contract. Even when the parties have expressly
provided that Time is the essence of the Contract, such stipulation would
have be read along with the other provisions of the Contract and on
construction and interpretation of the terms of the Contract, inference that
completion of the work by a particular date was intended to be fundamental,
may be excluded. For instance, if the Contract includes Clauses providing
extension of time in certain contingencies or for payment of fine or penalty
for every day or week, the work undertaken remains unfinished
on the expiry of the time provided in the contract, such clauses would be
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed CS(COMM) 225/2019 Page 52 of 65
By:VIKAS ARORA
Signing Date:08.10.2024
17:52:30
construed as rendering ineffective the express provision relating
to the time being the essence of the Contract.
Welspun Specialty Solutions Limited ... vs Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. ... on 13 November, 2021
173. Further, in Welspun Specialty Solutions Limited v Oil and Natural
Gas Corporation Ltd (2022) 2 SCC 382 the Apex Court held that having an
explicit clause alone may not be enough to make time the essence of the
contract; the entire contract and surrounding circumstances must be
considered to determine if time is of the essence, it was also observed that
the circumstances of the case are more important than the contract's
provisions when claiming liquidated damages.