Search Results for "set aside award"

6528 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 6528 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Considers Challenge to Arbitral Award in Construction Subcontract Dispute. Petition filed by main contractor against subcontractor's award under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Patel Engineering Co. Ltd (PEC) challenged an arbitral award dated 25 January 2010 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Enforcement of Foreign Award on Grounds of Arbitrator Bias — Upholds High Court Order. Alleged Conflict of Interest of Presiding Arbitrator Not Sufficient to Refuse Enforcement Under Section 48(2)(b) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals challenging the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award. The dispute arose from a Share Subscription Agreement bet...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner's Petition for Extension of Bank Guarantee Pending Challenge to Arbitral Award — Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Post-award interim protection can be granted under Section 9 to preserve the subject matter of arbitration pending challenge to award.

The petitioner, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC), filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seekin...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Allows Landowners’ Challenge to Land Acquisition Award and Corrigendum After 31 Years Due to Invalid Inclusion. Corrigendum Issued Without Statutory Power to Modify Final Award Beyond Reasonable Time Declared Void, and Award Excluding Landowners’ Land Not Binding.

The petitioners, legal heirs of the original landowner Late Ahamad Izzat Mohammed Hasham Dada, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Adjudicates Section 34 Petition Against Arbitral Award on Termination and Repudiation of Master Asset Purchase Agreement. Arbitrator's Finding of Repudiation by Purchaser and Direction for Refund of Consideration under MAPA Considered.

The dispute arose from a Master Asset Purchase Agreement (MAPA) dated 31st March 2005 between Siddhivinayak Realties Pvt. Ltd. as purchaser and V Hote...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Adjudicated Arbitration Petition Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Challenging Arbitral Award in Lease Finance Dispute. The Award Held Lessee Liable for Tax Demands Arising from Disallowance of Depreciation Under Income Tax Act, 1961.

The matter pertains to an arbitration petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the High Court of Judicatur...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Pronounces Verdict in Arbitration Petition Challenging Award That Set Aside Termination of Oil Terminal Operations Contract. Petition Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act Alleges Award is Patently Illegal as Arbitrator Disregarded Contract Terms and Misinterpreted Safety Audit Report.

The dispute arose from an Operating and Services Agreement (OSA) dated 5 May 2015 between HPCL and Aegis for management, operation and maintenance of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award in Joint Venture Dispute — No Grounds for Interference Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Court upholds arbitrator's findings on breach of joint venture agreement and rejection of counter claims as not perverse.

The petitioner, Development Corporation of Konkan Limited, a government company, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Bombay High Court Condonation of Delay in Filing Arbitration Challenge" "Justice Arif S. Doctor condones a 14-day delay in filing under Section 34, interpreting procedural requirements for signed arbitral awards in light of mandatory statute compliance."

1. Introduction and Parties The case involves the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) as the petitioner and Mumbai Metro One Pvt...