Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
13 judgments · newest first · showing 1–13
Umri Pooph Pratappur (UPP) Tollways Pvt. Ltd. entered into a 2012 concession agreement with Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation (MPRDC) for a state highway project. Disputes over cost overruns and delays led the appellant to first file a reference before the Madhya Pradesh Arbitration …
The State of Madhya Pradesh awarded a contract to M/S Sew Construction for a masonry dam, but the original sand quarry became depleted, prompting the contractor to seek an alternate quarry. The contract’s clause 3.11(A) allowed escalation of rates only if the circumstance was beyond the contractor’s …
M/s Essel Infra Projects Ltd. appealed against the State of Madhya Pradesh seeking directions for speedy disposal of proceedings under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, alleging that tribunal cases were taking up to five years. The Supreme Court examined the object of the …
The State of Madhya Pradesh and others filed a civil appeal (No. 4016 of 2018) challenging the High Court's dismissal of a revision petition filed by M/s Keti Construction. The appeal hinged on the applicability of a precedent set in Va Tech Escher Wyass Flovel Ltd. v. MPSE Board, which the High …
The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority challenging a High Court order that had invoked Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate a dispute. The dispute concerned the applicability of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham …
Puri Constructions entered into a 1984 agreement to construct an assembly building in Madhya Pradesh. A dispute led the Delhi High Court to appoint an arbitrator who rendered an award in 1989, which was later made a rule of court and executed in 1991. The appellant appealed the execution, and the …
The Supreme Court considered an appeal by M/s Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. against the Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation concerning the interpretation of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. The Court clarified that the term “ascertained money” in Section 2(d) includes …
The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that relied on an earlier judgment concerning the jurisdiction of arbitration tribunals under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. The Supreme Court observed that the earlier High Court …
The Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority filed a civil appeal against Backbone Enterprises Limited challenging the High Court's order that relied on the Va Tech judgment to decide the jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal. The Supreme Court observed that the Va Tech decision (Va Tech …
The State of Chhattisgarh appealed against an order of the High Court that had directed the parties to approach the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for resolution of a dispute with M/S KMC Construction Limited. The Supreme Court examined whether the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran …
M/S MSP Infrastructure Ltd. and M.P. Road Development Corp. entered into a road development contract that was later referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The arbitral tribunal awarded Rs. 6.90 crores to the appellant, after which the respondent filed a petition …
The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a civil revision under Section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, challenging an arbitral award dated 18 June 2003, but the revision was filed 80 days after the statutory three‑month period. The State also sought condonation of the delay …
The State of Madhya Pradesh filed a revision application before the High Court under Section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983, but the application was 80 days late. The issue was whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which allows condonation of delay, applies …
