Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 27 (0.27 seconds)Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals ... vs Eastern Engineering Enterprises & Anr on 20 September, 1999
In the case of Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd. (supra) the Supreme Court after considering the facts of the case came to the finding that by ignoring the specific terms of the contract, the Arbitrator has travelled beyond his jurisdiction and, therefore, the award was liable to be set aside. In the said case, there were specific clauses where the Contractor was not permitted to raise claims on certain issues. Moreover, the Contractor admitted that the rates were fixed but demanded payment of higher rates due to various difficulties faced by it. Another issue which was raised in the said case that the Arbitrator was asked to decide all claims raised before him and that the appellant had raised objection on the basis of Clauses 17 and 18 in its reply, but did not raise the same before the Arbitrator.
The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970
Continental Construction Co. Ltd vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 March, 1988
In support of the said contention, the decision (Continental Construction Co. Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh) was relied upon on behalf of the respondent. We need not dwell on this issue in great details.
Associated Engineering Co vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr on 15 July, 1991
By reason of our findings as aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the said decision of Associated Engineering Co. (supra) is of no assistance to the respondent.
Steel Authority Of India Limited vs J.C. Budharaja, Government And Mining ... on 1 September, 1999
We have already held that in the instant case there is no such bar, accordingly, the decision of Steel Authority of India Ltd. (supra) is also of no assistance to the respondent.
Messrs. P.M. Patel & Sons And Others, Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc on 25 September, 1985
In the case of P.M. Paul (supra) the appellant claimed escalation on the ground that the site was not handed over as agreed and, therefore, the work could not be completed within the stipulated time. On behalf of the respondent it was urged that in absence of any escalation clause in the contract, the claim for escalation could not be referred to the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator while deciding such question had travelled beyond his jurisdiction in awarding escalation.
M/S. Alopi Parshad & Sons, Ltd vs The Union Of India on 20 January, 1960
In the instant case, the change of rate of wages was not the natural incidence of escalation of rates, but was due to the notifications and/or circulars issued by the respondent fixing the rate of wages, which the appellant was required to pay to the labourers engaged by it. Therefore, the principles enunciated in the case of M/s. Alopi Parshad (supra) do not apply in the facts and circumstances of this case.
Union Of India & Ors vs M/S. Indo-Afghan Agencies Ltd on 22 November, 1967
In the case of Anglo Afghan Agencies (supra) the exporters claimed incentives for export of woolen goods to Afghanistan under a scheme called 'Export Promotion Scheme'.