Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 28 (0.27 seconds)
M/S. Lotus Education & Ors. vs . Aakash Educational Services Ltd. & ... on 15 April, 2023 cites

Associate Builders vs Delhi Development Authority on 25 November, 2014

41. What is important to note is that a decision which is perverse, as understood in paras 31 and 32 of Associate Builders [Associate Builders v. DDA, (2015) 3 SCC 49 : (2015) 2 SCC (Civ) 204] , while no longer being a ground for challenge under "public policy of India", would certainly amount to a patent illegality appearing on the face of the award. Thus, a finding based on no evidence at all or an award which ignores vital evidence in arriving at its decision would be perverse and liable to be set aside on the ground of patent illegality.
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 2182 - R F Nariman - Full Document

Perkins Eastman Architects Dpc & Anr vs Hscc India Limited on 17 March, 2023

In Proddatur Cable TV Digi Services v. Siti Cable Network Limited (2020) 267 DLT 51, the learned Single Judge of this Court, following the decision in TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. (supra) and Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Ltd. (supra), held that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party is impermissible."
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 1 - Cited by 100 - Y Varma - Full Document

Trf Ltd. vs Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. & Anr. on 17 February, 2017

In Proddatur Cable TV Digi Services v. Siti Cable Network Limited (2020) 267 DLT 51, the learned Single Judge of this Court, following the decision in TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. (supra) and Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Ltd. (supra), held that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party is impermissible."
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 201 - S Muralidhar - Full Document
1   2 3 Next