Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.53 seconds)Section 24 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Article 18 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 19 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Haldiram (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs M/S. Haldiram Bhujiawala & Anr. on 8 April, 2009
17. While dismissing the aforesaid application, the learned Arbitrator
took note of the judicial pronouncements in the case of Asia Pacific
Breweries v. Superior Industries (2009) 109 DRJ 497, Sri Ramanand v.
Delhi Development Authority 2016 SCC Online Del 4925, Polyflor Ltd. v.
Sh AN Goenka 2016 SCC Online Del 2333, Crocs INC USA v. Liberty
Shoes & Ors 2018 SCC Online Del 10325, Gold Rock World Trade Ltd v.
Veejay Lakshmi Engineering Works Ltd (2007) 143 DLT 113, Haldiram
(India) Pvt Ltd v. Haldiram Bhujiawala & Anr. 2009 (109) DRJ 639 and
Fats Inc v. Zen Technological Ltd 2008 (103) DRJ 693.
Fats Inc. vs Zen Technologies Limited on 25 January, 2008
17. While dismissing the aforesaid application, the learned Arbitrator
took note of the judicial pronouncements in the case of Asia Pacific
Breweries v. Superior Industries (2009) 109 DRJ 497, Sri Ramanand v.
Delhi Development Authority 2016 SCC Online Del 4925, Polyflor Ltd. v.
Sh AN Goenka 2016 SCC Online Del 2333, Crocs INC USA v. Liberty
Shoes & Ors 2018 SCC Online Del 10325, Gold Rock World Trade Ltd v.
Veejay Lakshmi Engineering Works Ltd (2007) 143 DLT 113, Haldiram
(India) Pvt Ltd v. Haldiram Bhujiawala & Anr. 2009 (109) DRJ 639 and
Fats Inc v. Zen Technological Ltd 2008 (103) DRJ 693.
Union Of India vs U.P.State Bridge Corp. Ltd. on 16 September, 2014
41. The learned Single Judge also rightly relied upon the judgments of
the Supreme Court in UP. State Bridge Corpn. Ltd. (supra) and Alpine
Housing Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashok S. Dhariwal, 2023
SCC OnLine SC 55, to emphasize that one of the cardinal foundations of
the efficacy of the arbitration is "fair, speedy and inexpensive trial". It was
rightly held that in the facts of the present case, there was no warrant to
entertain Appellant's belated application, which could have taken the case
back to the stage of trial and examination of witnesses.