Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.37 seconds)The Arbitration Act, 1940
Section 48 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 31 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The State Of Jharkhand vs M/S Hss Integrated Sdn on 18 October, 2019
52. Further, in State of Jharkhand vs. HSS Integrated DSN, (2019) 9
SCC 798, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that even when there are more
than one plausible views and the Arbitrator, in his wisdom, adopts one of
them, having given reasons for his findings, the Courts shall not interfere
with such an Award. It was observed as under:-
Murlidhar Agarwal And Anr vs State Of U.P. And Ors on 26 July, 1974
91. Mathew, J. speaking for the Court in Murlidhar
Aggarwal v. State of U.P. 27 referred to Winfield's definition
in Public Policy in English Common Law 42 Harvard Law
Review 76 to declare that: (SCC p. 482, para 31)
―31. Public policy does not remain static in any given
community. It may vary from generation to generation
and even in the same generation. Public policy would
be almost useless if it were to remain in fixed moulds
for all time.‖
State Of Chhattisgarh vs M/S Sal Udyog(P) Ltd on 8 November, 2021
63. While discussing the fundamentals of patent illegality, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in State of Chhattisgarh vs. Sal Udyog (P) Ltd., (2022) 2
SCC 275 held as under:-