Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 38 (0.41 seconds)
Mohd. Amin (Deceased) Through Lrs & Ors. vs Mohd. Iqbal (Deceased) Through Lrs & ... on 5 April, 2024 cites

Renusagar Power Co. Ltd vs General Electric Co on 7 October, 1993

Ltd. v. General Electric Co., 1994 Supp (1) SCC 644], this Court observed that violation of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, a statute enacted for the ―national economic interest‖, and disregarding the superior Courts in India would be antithetical to the fundamental policy of Indian law. Contravention of a statute not linked to public policy or public interest cannot be a ground to set at naught an arbitral award as being discordant with the fundamental policy of Indian law and neither can it be brought within the confines of ―patent illegality‖ as discussed above. In other words, contravention of a statute only if it is linked to public Digitally Signed By:AMIT ARORA O.M.P. (COMM) 250/2021 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 129/2021 Page 18 of 41 Signing Date:05.04.2024 16:29:33 policy or public interest is cause for setting aside the award as being at odds with the fundamental policy of Indian law. If an arbitral award shocks the conscience of the court, it can be set aside as being in conflict with the most basic notions of justice. The ground of morality in this context has been interpreted by this Court to encompass awards involving elements of sexual morality, such as prostitution, or awards seeking to validate agreements which are not illegal but would not be enforced given the prevailing mores of the day.
Supreme Court of India Cites 62 - Cited by 661 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Dwaraka Das vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Anr on 10 February, 1999

71. In deciding objections under Section 34 of the Act, this Court is to refrain from interfering in a finding by the learned Arbitrator as long as it is a plausible and reasoned one. I am of the view that the finding of the learned Arbitrator that since the construction has been dismantled by the petitioners while the disputed land was in their custody and possession and hence they are required to pay monetary value thereof is a plausible one given the sequence of events. The quantification is also reasonable and on sound legal Digitally Signed By:AMIT ARORA O.M.P. (COMM) 250/2021 & OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 129/2021 Page 38 of 41 Signing Date:05.04.2024 16:29:33 basis on account of the judgment in Dwaraka Das v. State of M.P., (1999) 3 SCC 500 relied upon by the learned Arbitrator, which allows for damages based on guess-work (as perceived to be reasonable) when little evidence regarding the actual damages is forthcoming.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 202 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next