Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)Section 34 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration Act, 1940
Section 29 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Topanmal Chhotamal vs Kundomal Gangaram And Ors. on 8 September, 1959
In Topanmal
Chhotamal v. Kundomal Gangaram3, a three-Judge Bench held as
follows:
Meenakshi Saxena vs Ecgc Ltd(Formerly Known As Export ... on 18 May, 2018
17. Yet again, in Meenakshi Saxena v. ECGC Ltd4it was
reiterated that:
Sanwarlal Agrawal vs Ashok Kumar Kothari on 21 February, 2023
7. As an Executing Court, it is not possible for me to go behind the
award of which execution is sought. Sanwarlal Agrawal v. Ashok
Kumar Kothari2 thus sets the law in perspective:
M/S D Khosla And Company vs Union Of India on 14 July, 2022
6. The "above mentioned amounts" quite obviously relate to the
amounts covered by sub paras a. to l. of para 236. What Mr. Vibhor
Garg, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to contend is that the
amounts covered by sub paras d., e., f., h., i. and k. of para 236, which
represent interest, should be excluded from this mandate. He submits
that the direction for payment of post award interest @ 18% per
annum, in para 239, cannot include the interest components of para
236 as that would amount to awarding interest on interest, which is
impermissible. He places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme
Court, rendered the day before yesterday, in D. Khosla & Co v. UOI1.
1