Search Results for "laytime statement"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Compulsory Retirement Case Based on Declining ...
Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Determination that Non-Signatory to MoS Not B...

Search Results for "laytime statement"

8 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 8 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award in Demurrage Claim Dispute. Claim for demurrage and detention charges held time-barred under Article 55 of Limitation Act, 1963 as the cause of action arose on completion of discharge, not on subsequent demand.

8 Oct 2025

The Petitioner, National Iranian Tanker Company, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging a majorit...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appointment of Arbitrator in Charter Party Dispute Over Detention Charges. Arbitration agreement held valid and arbitrable despite respondent's objections regarding limitation and non-signing of charter party.

28 Jul 2023

The applicant, Alliance Import and Export, a partnership firm, filed two arbitration applications under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Dismisses Appeal Under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Upholding Demurrage Claim. Interpretation of Clause 10(v) of Coal Supply Contract as Creating Primary Liability, Not Indemnity, and Binding Effect of Laytime Statement When No Disagreement Raised Within 30 Days Upheld.

21 Dec 2016

The dispute arose out of a contract dated 18 September 1999 between Ultratech Cement Ltd. (appellant, formerly Larsen & Toubro Ltd.) and Sunfield Reso...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Under Section 37 of Arbitration Act in Demurrage Dispute, Upholding Concurrent Findings Below. Clause 10(v) Held to Create Direct Liability for Demurrage, Not Indemnity, and Counterclaim for Option Cargo Damages Rejected.

21 Dec 2016

The dispute arose from a coal supply contract dated 18 September 1999 between the appellant, an Indian company, and the respondent, an Australian comp...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award in Demurrage Dispute. Charter Party Agreement's Demurrage Clause Upheld as Petitioner Failed to Prove Excepted Perils.

21 Dec 2012

The petitioner, Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), challenged an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, ...

High Court

High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Majority Arbitral Award in Maritime Demurrage Dispute — Claim Time-Barred Under Charterparty Clause 24. The court upheld the majority arbitrators' finding that the demurrage claim was received beyond the 45-day period stipulated in clause 24 of the Tanker Voyage Charterparty, and thus the claim was time-barred.

4 Jan 2012

The petitioner, Axios Navigation Co. Ltd., a shipowner, challenged a majority arbitral award dated 18 August 2008 passed by a three-member Arbitral Tr...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award in Charter Party Demurrage Dispute — Upholds Arbitrator's Interpretation of Laytime and Demurrage Clauses. Court holds that Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not permit reappreciation of evidence or correction of errors of law unless award is patently illegal or perverse.

15 Jul 2011

The petitioners, M/s. Puyvast Chartering B.V. (owner) and M/s. Puyvast Maritime India Ltd. (agent), challenged an arbitral award dated 28 February 200...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Arbitral Award in Demurrage Dispute — Upholds Arbitrator's Interpretation of Contractual Time Bar Clause. The court held that the arbitrator's finding that the petitioner failed to raise dispute within 30 days was based on evidence and not perverse, and demurrage was not conditional on indemnity.

30 Jun 2005

The case arises from a contract between Larsen & Toubro Limited (petitioner) and Sunfield Resources Pvt. Ltd. (respondent) for the supply of steaming ...

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)