Scribd
Upload
33 views2 pages

SC58

Uploaded by

kepehip295
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
33 views2 pages

SC58

Uploaded by

kepehip295
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

AABBCC

This Case Explanation includes important Laws, background of case, Facts of case, question
in matter, judgment and reference cases.

First
Important Laws covered in the case are,
 Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
 Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
 Section 2(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1940
 Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1940
 Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1940
 Article 136 of Indian Constitution

Second
Background of case
 This appeal was filed in the Supreme Court of India under Section 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an award passed by the
arbitrator.
Third
Facts of the case

 The Supreme Court referred the matter for adjudication to Hon’ble Justice
S.B Sinha, a retired Judge of the Supreme Court. The arbitration proceedings
were directed to be concluded promptly.
 The arbitrator, as directed, concluded the arbitration proceedings and passed
an award. A copy of the award was submitted to the Supreme Court.
 The appellants challenged the award by filing a petition before the Civil
Court.
 The respondents filed an affidavit requesting the Supreme Court to
pronounce judgment in terms of the award.

Fourth
question in matter
 Whether this Court can entertain an application for making the award as Rule
of the Court, even if it retains seisin over arbitral proceedings?

Fifth
judgment stated
 Citing legal precedents, such as Bharat Coking Coal Limited vs. Annapurna
Construction and Associated Contractors vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.,
the Supreme Court noted a difference of opinion on the entertainability of an
application to make the award a rule of the Court when the Court retains
jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings.
As a result, the matter was referred to a larger bench to decide whether the
Supreme Court can entertain such applications while retaining jurisdiction
over arbitral proceedings.
Sixth
Reference cases used in judgment
 Mcdermott International INC. vs. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and Others ] 2005
(10) SCC 353
 State of Rajasthan vs. Nav Bharat Construction Company (2), 2010 (2) SCC
182
 Bharat Coking Coal Limited vs. Annapurna Construction (2008) 6 SCC 732
 State of West Bengal and Ors. vs. Associated Contractors (2015) 1 SCC 32.
 State of M.P. vs. Saith and Skelton (P) Ltd. (1972) 1 SCC 702
 Guru Nanak Foundation vs. Rattan Singh and Sons (1981) 4 SCC 634

YYZZXX

You might also like