cites: 54708574

4. It is the petitioner's contention that the judgements of the Supreme Court in Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A. and Another (supra) and Venture Global Engineering v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. and Another (2008) 4 SCC 190, have only been prospectively overruled by the Supreme Court in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra) and therefore maintainability of the present petition, where the impugned award pre-dates the judgement in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra), would not be impacted. In this regard, reliance has been placed on paragraph 195-197 of the said judgement which reads as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 263 - S N Variava - Full Document

Union of India - Act Cites 0 - Cited by 30941

4. It is the petitioner's contention that the judgements of the Supreme Court in Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A. and Another (supra) and Venture Global Engineering v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. and Another (2008) 4 SCC 190, have only been prospectively overruled by the Supreme Court in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra) and therefore maintainability of the present petition, where the impugned award pre-dates the judgement in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra), would not be impacted. In this regard, reliance has been placed on paragraph 195-197 of the said judgement which reads as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 128 - Cited by 398 - Full Document

4. It is the petitioner's contention that the judgements of the Supreme Court in Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A. and Another (supra) and Venture Global Engineering v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. and Another (2008) 4 SCC 190, have only been prospectively overruled by the Supreme Court in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra) and therefore maintainability of the present petition, where the impugned award pre-dates the judgement in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Ltd. (supra), would not be impacted. In this regard, reliance has been placed on paragraph 195-197 of the said judgement which reads as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 168 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 22777

This is now well settled by a series of decisions of this Court [see Videocon Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [(2011) 6 SCC 161: (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 257], Dozco India (P) Ltd. v. Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd. [(2011) 6 SCC 179 : (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 276] , Yograj Infrastructure Ltd. v. Ssang Yong Engg. and Construction Co. Ltd. [(2011) 9 SCC 735 : (2011) 4 SCC (Civ) 864] , the very judgment in this case reported in Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, (2014) 7 SCC 603 : (2014) 3 SCC (Civ) 737] and a recent judgment in Harmony Innovation Shipping Ltd. v. Gupta Coal India Ltd. [(2015) 9 SCC 172 : (2015) 4 SCC (Civ) 341] ].

Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 38 - S Yadav - Full Document

This is now well settled by a series of decisions of this Court [see Videocon Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [(2011) 6 SCC 161: (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 257], Dozco India (P) Ltd. v. Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd. [(2011) 6 SCC 179 : (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 276] , Yograj Infrastructure Ltd. v. Ssang Yong Engg. and Construction Co. Ltd. [(2011) 9 SCC 735 : (2011) 4 SCC (Civ) 864] , the very judgment in this case reported in Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, (2014) 7 SCC 603 : (2014) 3 SCC (Civ) 737] and a recent judgment in Harmony Innovation Shipping Ltd. v. Gupta Coal India Ltd. [(2015) 9 SCC 172 : (2015) 4 SCC (Civ) 341] ].

Competition Commission of India Cites 23 - Cited by 287 - Full Document

This is now well settled by a series of decisions of this Court [see Videocon Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [(2011) 6 SCC 161: (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 257], Dozco India (P) Ltd. v. Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd. [(2011) 6 SCC 179 : (2011) 3 SCC (Civ) 276] , Yograj Infrastructure Ltd. v. Ssang Yong Engg. and Construction Co. Ltd. [(2011) 9 SCC 735 : (2011) 4 SCC (Civ) 864] , the very judgment in this case reported in Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, (2014) 7 SCC 603 : (2014) 3 SCC (Civ) 737] and a recent judgment in Harmony Innovation Shipping Ltd. v. Gupta Coal India Ltd. [(2015) 9 SCC 172 : (2015) 4 SCC (Civ) 341] ].

Supreme Court of India Cites 41 - Cited by 39 - D Misra - Full Document

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 19233

7. Subsequently, in Union of India v. Reliance Industries Limited and Others 2015 (10) SCC 213, the Supreme Court has clarified the aforesaid paragraph 32 in Bhatia International (supra) by holding as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 47 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Search Results Page