Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.30 seconds)Food Corporation Of India vs M/S.Chandu Construction & Anr on 10 April, 2007
42. He stated that the judgment, relied by the counsel for the
petitioner, of the Supreme Court in the case of Food Corporation of
India (supra), do not apply in the present matter in as much as the fact
that the arbitrator has not travelled beyond the scope of the contract and
has not dealt with any issue outside the preview of the contract, and the
petitioner herein, failed to point out any specific instance where the
Arbitrator is alleged to have travelled outside the scope of the contract.
Associate Builders vs Delhi Development Authority on 25 November, 2014
58. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal is justified in relying upon the judgment
of the Supreme Court in the case of Associate Builders (supra)
wherein, the Supreme Court has clearly held as under:
Delhi Jal Board vs M/S Kaveri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & ... on 29 November, 2013
59. The judgments relied upon by Dr. Singhi in the case of Delhi
Jal Board (supra) and Food Corporation of India (supra), to contend
that the learned Arbitrator cannot travel beyond the contract. The said
proposition of law cannot be disputed, but, I find that the learned
Arbitrator has not travelled beyond the contract as alleged by Dr.
Singhi. Hence, the said judgments have no applicability to the facts of
this case.
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 75 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
1