Input string was not in a correct format.A network-related or instance-specific error occurred while establishing a connection to SQL Server. The server was not found or was not accessible. Verify that the instance name is correct and that SQL Server is configured to allow remote connections. (provider: Named Pipes Provider, error: 40 - Could not open a connection to SQL Server) Latest News, India News, Breaking News, Bollywood, Sports : TodayIndya

Latest News

  • Home
  • SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award
SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award
Thursday, April 20, 2017 IST
SC:No Intra-Court Appeal Against Condonation Of Delay By The  Single Judge In Plea To Set Aside Arbitration Award


The Supreme Court, in Union of India vs M/S Simplex Infrastructures, has reiterated that intra-court legal instrument charm beneath clause fifteen of the legal instrument of court at city isn't reparable  against AN order gone by the one choose on AN application for pardon of delay filed in conjunction with the petition for setting aside AN arbitration award A division bench of city court, holding that intra-court charm is reparable  against single choose order condoning the delay, had reversed the order by invoking its jurisdiction beneath legal instrument charm.

Referring to the choice in Fuerst Day Lawson restricted vs Jindal Exports restricted, the bench comprising Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar command that the remedy of legal instrument charm against that call is unavailable  and also the question as-as to whether the one choose had justly exercised the discretion or otherwise may well be assailed before the apex court by approach of special leave petition.

Even if the learned single choose might have committed manifest error or wrong set the appliance for a pardon of delay, that judgment is imputable to exercise jurisdiction under Section 34(3) of the Act,” the bench said.

The court also noted that that remedy of appeal has been provided only against an order of setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34(1) (c) and no appeal is provided against an order passed by the court of competent jurisdiction condoning the delay in filing the petition under Section 34 of the Act as such .

The bench also disapproved of the ratio in the high court judgment, which had distinguished the decision in Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd by holding that the judgment of the single judge of condoning the delay in filing of the petition under Section 34 of the Act was without jurisdiction and not in terms of the provisions of the Act.

“It is not possible to countenance this approach,” the bench said allowing the appeal against the division bench order.

 
 

 
 

 
 

Source :

 
 
 

Related Topics

 
 
 

Trending News & Articles

 

More in

 
 
 

   Prashnavali

  Thought of the Day

“Learn to let go. That is the key to happiness.”
Buddha

Be the first one to comment on this story

Close
Post Comment
Shibu Chandran
2 hours ago

Serving political interests in another person's illness is the lowest form of human value. A 70+ y old lady has cancer.

November 28, 2016 05:00 IST
Shibu Chandran
2 hours ago

Serving political interests in another person's illness is the lowest form of human value. A 70+ y old lady has cancer.

November 28, 2016 05:00 IST
Shibu Chandran
2 hours ago

Serving political interests in another person's illness is the lowest form of human value. A 70+ y old lady has cancer.

November 28, 2016 05:00 IST
Shibu Chandran
2 hours ago

Serving political interests in another person's illness is the lowest form of human value. A 70+ y old lady has cancer.

November 28, 2016 05:00 IST


ads
Back To Top