Arbitration Archives - Page 31 of 31 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

September 9, 2025 12:21 pm

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Schedule I, Rule 4 – Jurisdiction of Umpire – Failure of Arbitrator to make award within a stipulated time – Umpire is competent to enter upon the reference without any order from court.

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

AIR 1975 SC 230 : AIR 1974 SC 230 : (1975) 1 SCC 289 : (1975) 2 SCR 811 : (1975) 7 UJ 2 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA N.…

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Section 30 – Challenge to award – Procedure – Objections to award not filed – Challenge by way of writ petition is not maintainable.

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

AIR 1981 SC 479 : (1980) 4 SCC 556 : (1980) 12 UJ 988 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SMT. RUKMANIBAI GUPTA — Appellant Vs. COLLECTOR JABALPUR AND OTHERS — Respondent…

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Sections 30 and 33 – Error of law – Specific reference to arbitrator – Effect of – Scope of arbitration clause referred to arbitrator

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

AIR 1984 SC 1072 : (1984) 2 CompLJ 1 : (1984) 1 SCALE 411 : (1984) 2 SCC 680 : (1984) 3 SCR 118 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA TARAPORE AND…

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Sections 30 and 33 – Arbitration award – Interference by Court – Scope of –

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

AIR 1987 SC 81 : (1987) 1 ARBLR 29 : (1986) JT 818 : (1986) 2 SCALE 756 : (1986) 1 SCC 506 Supp : (1987) 1 UJ 247 SUPREME…

Arbitration

Arbitration–Term ‘dispute’–Must be given its general meaning under the 1996. Arbitration–Where there exists an arbitration agreement, the Court is under obligation to refer the parties to arbitration in terms of the arbitration agreement.

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 625 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 326 of 2007…

Arbitration

Non speaking awards–Award passed under the old Act could not be set-aside on the ground that they were not supported by reasons & were not speaking one.

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 568 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. AR. Lakshmanan The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.S. Sirpurkar Civil Appeal No. 266 of…

Arbitration

Arbitration agreement—Conduct of the parties—Parties accepted that there was an arbitration agreement & proceeded on that basis

Apr 7, 2017 sclaw

2007(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 401 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. H. Kapadia Civil Appeal No. 149 of 2007 Krishna…

You missed

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Section 25 — Enforcement of orders — Pre-2002 amendment and post-2019 Act, all orders could be enforced as decrees. The period between 15.03.2003 to 20.07.2020 saw an anomaly where only interim orders (and monetary recovery) were clearly enforceable under Section 25, leaving final non-monetary orders in a gap. Interpretation of Statutes — Casus omissus — Court can fill gaps in legislation using interpretative tools like purposive construction when literal interpretation leads to absurdity or defeats the object of the Act, especially for remedial legislation like the Consumer Act.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

Service

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 39(d) and 43 — Equal pay for equal work — Contractual Assistant Professors performing identical duties as regularly appointed or ad-hoc Assistant Professors are entitled to the minimum pay scale of Assistant Professors.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Chapter I-A — Slum Rehabilitation Schemes — Preferential right of landowner to redevelop — Section 3B(4)(e) and Section 13(1) confer a preferential right on the landowner to redevelop a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area) — SRA can undertake redevelopment only if the landowner fails to come forward with a scheme within a reasonable time

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

State Laws

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 — Sections 3C, 13, 14 — Waiver of preferential right — Waiver of landowner’s preferential right to redevelop requires clear and overt communication by the owner of intention not to exercise the right — Mere inaction or delay, particularly when the owner has consistently shown intent to redevelop, does not constitute waiver, especially if no invitation for redevelopment was issued.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

Category: Arbitration

You missed