respondent.
Execution Application (No.554 of 2011) is filed by the petitioner for
execution of the said foreign award dated ... petitioner filed an Execution
application (554 of 2011) in this court and applied for execution of the
said foreign award dated 25th
respondent.
Execution Application (No.554 of 2011) is filed by the petitioner for
execution of the said foreign award dated ... petitioner filed an Execution
application (554 of 2011) in this court and applied for execution of the
said foreign award dated 25th
respondent.
Execution Application (No.554 of 2011) is filed by the petitioner for
execution of the said foreign award dated ... petitioner filed an Execution
application (554 of 2011) in this court and applied for execution of the
said foreign award dated 25th
Limitation Act specifically for making an
application for execution of a foreign Award which
is capable of being converted into a decree ... such an application
would be governed by the residuary Article 137
and therefore, an application for execution of a
foreign Award which
supra).
It is submitted that the instant application is not an application for
enforcement of a foreign award under Section 48 of the Arbitration ... Conciliation Act, 1996. The instant application for dismissal cannot be used
indirectly for enforcing a foreign award resulting in dismissal of a validly
instituted
application is filed by the award holder. The said
provisions do not even contemplate two several applications, one deciding
enforceability of foreign award and the other for execution of foreign award. In
this regard the defendant has referred to the following decisions
supra).
It is submitted that the instant application is not an application for
enforcement of a foreign award under Section 48 of the Arbitration ... Conciliation Act, 1996. The instant application for dismissal cannot be used
indirectly for enforcing a foreign award resulting in dismissal of a validly
instituted
said order passed by the BIFR, the present
application for execution of the foreign awards is not maintainable. He
submits that ... enforcement of the foreign
award may be refused. Both the foreign awards are thus enforceable
under Part II of the Arbitration
said order passed by the BIFR, the present
application for execution of the foreign awards is not maintainable. He
submits that ... enforcement of the foreign
award may be refused. Both the foreign awards are thus enforceable
under Part II of the Arbitration
execution application to enforce a foreign arbitral award dated 23rd February,
2013, in favour of the petitioner, the judgement debtor has taken various ... application to challenge the award in an English Court, to which such
application necessarily lay.
This award is a foreign award under
