Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)
Engineering Project India vs Bharat Constrcution on 7 March, 2026 cites

Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. on 9 September, 2021

5. Before adverting to the rival claims of the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to remind itself of the scope of powers U/s 34 of the Arbitration Act. It has been held in Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Civil Appeal no. 5627 of 2021, Arising out of SLP (C) no. 4115 of 2019 decided on 09.09.2021 as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 282 - L N Rao - Full Document

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd vs M/S Dewan Chand Ram Saran on 25 April, 2012

"...22. A cumulative reading of the UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules, the legislative intent with which the 1996 Act is made, Section 5 and Section 34 of the 1996 Act would make it clear that judicial interference with the arbitral awards is limited to the grounds in Section 34. While deciding applications filed under Section 34 of the Act, courts are mandated to strictly act in accordance with and within the confines of Section 34, refraining from appreciation or re- appreciation of matters of fact as well as law. (See: Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited. v. Northern Coal Field Limited. 1, Bhaven Construction Through Authorised Signatory Premjibhai K. Shah v. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. and Another2 and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited v. Dewan Chand Ram Saran3 ).
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 317 - H L Gokhale - Full Document
1