Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
7 judgments · newest first · showing 1–7
The lands of Parmal Singh and others were requisitioned by the Central Government in 1963 under the Defence of India Act, 1962 and subsequently acquired in 1965. The Special Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation, which the owners contested, leading to arbitration awards that included interest. …
The case concerned whether an arbitrator appointed, with or without court intervention, could award interest on sums due for the period before the arbitration reference (pre‑reference period) in disputes that arose before the Interest Act, 1978. The contractor’s award included interest from the due …
Sovintorg (India) Ltd. deposited a cheque for Rs 1 lakh with State Bank of India in June 1983; although the cheque was cleared, the proceeds were not credited to its account for seven years. The company claimed compensation, damages and 24% interest under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The State …
The contractors M.K. Shah Engineers and Chabaldas & Sons were engaged by the State of Madhya Pradesh to construct the Barna Main Dam. Their contracts contained an arbitration clause requiring a prior decision by the Superintending Engineer (SE) and a 28‑day notice to challenge it before arbitration …
The appellant, a contractor, entered into a contract to construct a food‑grains godown for the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The engineer withheld part of the payment alleging that the work was not executed as per the contract. The dispute was referred to an arbitrator who awarded the contractor the …
The Supreme Court examined whether an arbitrator, appointed without court intervention, could award interest for the period before the reference and for the pendente lite period of the arbitration. It held that an arbitrator is not a court within the meaning of CPC s.34 and therefore cannot award …
The appellant entered into a 1951 deed of exchange with the State of Rajasthan for a plot swap, but the State failed to deliver the exchanged plot. The appellant sued for possession and compensation; interrogatories revealed the exchanged plot had been transferred to a third party and his original …
