Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.20 seconds)
Senbo Engineering Ltd vs East Central Railway on 29 August, 2022 cites

M/S.J.G.Engineers Pvt.Ltd vs Union Of India & Anr on 28 April, 2011

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in J.G. Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Anr., (2011) 5 SCC 758 to fortify his argument that the reason shown for reversal of the fact finding recorded in the award by the Court in exercising the power conferred under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 which was based upon the non-consideration of the terms and conditions of the agreement, since, the learned sole Arbitrator has considered the accountability in non-conclusion of the work within the stipulated period and exactly in the similar circumstances, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case, has decided the issue, as to whether the appellant was responsible for the delay in execution of the work, was arbitrable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 265 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

Director (Marketing) Indian Oil Corpn. ... vs Santosh Kumar on 23 May, 2006

postulates consideration of all relevant aspects of a matter. Thus, formation of opinion by the statutory authority should reflect intense application of mind with reference to the material available on record. The order of the authority itself should reveal such application of mind. The appellate authority cannot simply adopt the language employed by the disciplinary authority and proceed to affirm its order. (Vide Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. v. Santosh Kumar [(2006) 11 SCC 147 : (2007) 1 SCC (L&S) 388] and Bhikhubhai Vithlabhai Patel v. State of Gujarat [(2008) 4 SCC 144 : AIR 2008 SC 1771] ."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 130 - A R Lakshmanan - Full Document
1