REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

MAHALINGASHETTY AND CO. LTD. Appellant

V/S

NPCC LTD. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

VARKEY V. STATE OF KERALA [DISTINGUISHED]
J.K. ENTERPRISES V. WIN MEDICARE LIMITED [DISTINGUISHED]
M/S. ROYAL CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. V. NATIONAL PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED. [REFERRED TO]
FLEXI PACKS V. MODERN FOOD INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. [RELIED ON]
HARI KRISHNA WATTAL VS. VAIKUNTH NATH PANDYA [RELIED ON]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. HARDYAL [RELIED ON]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. CHANDRA MANI [REFERRED TO]
MILKFOOD LIMITED VS. GMC ICE CREAM PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
CZECH OCEAN SHIPPING VS. M M T C [RELIED ON]
RAVINDER KUMAR KHANNA VS. NATIONAL HYDROELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LIMITED [RELIED ON]
D D A VS. BHAI SARDAR SINGH [RELIED ON]
HINDUSTHAN STEEL LTD VS. AMARNATH SHARMA [DISTINGUISHED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of petitioner's application under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for extension of time for making the award where the last arbitration proceedings had taken place from 27.12.1989 to 29.12.1989.

(2.) Few brief facts to comprehend the controversy are that the contract of respondent No. 1 to carry out the work, namely, irrigation and drainage project in Iraq was accepted by Ministry of Industry and Mineral of Republic of Iraq. The respondent No. 1/contractor was authorized to appoint two sub-contractors, petitioner and M/s. Royal Construction Company who were appointed as subcontractors.

(3.) That the agreement between the respondent No. 1 and the petitioner as a sub contractor had an arbitration clause. As disputes arose in respect of work negotiated between the petitioner and respondent No. 1, an Arbitrator was appointed by respondent No. 1.

Click here to view full judgment.

MAHALINGASHETTY AND CO Vs. NPCC LTD

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address