Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.56 seconds)
M/S Anant Raj Agencies vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr. on 24 January, 2001 cites

State Of Kerala vs K. Bhaskaran on 31 August, 1984

16. Reliance has also been placed upon State of Kerala Vs. K.Bhaskaran wherein the objection of the respondent that the best evidence should be produced by the claimant was considered and it was observed that the best estimate of the amount should be allowed by the arbitrator by the circumstances and fairly persuasive evidence, the most convincing and best available under the particular circumstances of the case will suffice. The respondent has not disclosed as to what was the best evidence available with the petitioner. The evidence relied upon by the arbitrator was fairly persuasive and the only evidence available with the claimant. It there was some other evidence available countering the claim of the claimant in this regard the respondent was free to produce the same.
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 14 - M F Beevi - Full Document

Yogesh Kant Bhageria vs Deepak Jain on 16 September, 1999

25. While relying upon the decision of this Court in case Yogesh kant Bhageria Vs. Deepak Jain 1999 V AD(Delhi)860 wherein in was held that in the absence of a contract the respondent would be entitled to interest at the current rate which is defined in Section 2 of the Interest Act contended that highest rate is at which the interest is paid on different classes of deposits by the schedule Banks in accordance with the directions of Reserve Bank of India under Banking Regulation Act, 1949. I am afraid the facts of the above case are quite distinguishable as in the said case the respondent was doing the business of money lending without any license and the loan acknowledgement receipts were unstamped. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties as issue was struck as to what rate of interest the plaintiff is entitled to recover. It was in view of these facts the provisions of Interest Act were taken resort to and the expression 'current rate of interest' as contained in clause(b) Section 2 of the Interest Act the rate of interest was awarded at 12% per annum. That was the current rate of interest at the relevant time. However in the instant case interest has been awarded at the current rate of interest. Though the Arbitrator has powers to award reasonable rate of interest as prevalent in the transactions of the Bank and the Bank Certificate shows that the current rate of interest was 24.4% whereas the interest awarded by the arbitrator is 18%. Even in the Government of India Gazette Notification C-82 the prevailing rate of interest is 18%.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

The New India Civil Erectors(P) Ltd vs Oil & Natural Gas Corporation on 17 February, 1997

5. Reliance by the counsel for the respondent upon The New India Civil Erectors(P) Limited Vs. Oil & Natural Gas Commission JT 1997 (2) SC 633 is misplaced as in the said case the Arbitrator was found to have acted contrary to the stipulation about balconies and awarded the amount and it was held that the Arbitrator could not have awarded any amount about extra expenses incurred in the construction after the expiry of contract when tender agreement stated that there would be no escalation on any ground. It is not the case here. Rather the observations of the Supreme Court in the above referred case were other way round. It was held that the attempt of the Court should always be to support the award within the letter of law and no interference is permissible on the ground that the Arbitrator has misconstrued the terms of the agreement. The contention of the counsel for the respondent is wholly unacceptable and devoid of merit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 119 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1