Del. HC: Denying Seat to Candidate Due to Administrative Fault Would be Unjust  ||  All. HC: Not Mandatory for Passport Authority to Impound Passport of Accused Persons  ||  Raj. HC: In Absence of Statutory Rules, Denying Appt. on Basis of Minimum Height is Discriminatory  ||  MP HC: Party Required to Lay Factual Foundation for Getting Benefit of Section 65 of Evidence Act  ||  Ker. HC: Settlement of Cases Including Offence of Rape & POCSO Act Offences is Not Permissible  ||  Gujarat High Court: Wife Allowed to Become Guardian & Manager of Husband in Coma  ||  SC: Partition of Property Can’t be Done by Metes & Bounds in Chandigarh  ||  SC Approves Requirement for Judicial Officers to be Converse With Local Language  ||  Kerala High Court: Denial of Ordinary Leave Reduces Convict’s Chances of Rehabilitation  ||  Delhi HC Issues Circular Regarding Pass-Overs or Adjournments in Bail, Parole Matters    

Union of India (UOI) v. Reliance Industries Limited and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (22 Sep 2015)

Supreme Court dismisses UoI plea to hear arbitration dispute with Reliance

MANU/SC/1064/2015

Arbitration

Noting the “valiant attempt to reopen a question settled twice over, that is by dismissal of both a review petition and a curative petition on the very ground urged before us, must meet with the same fate” by the Union of India, the Court dismissed its petition on the maintainability of dispute arising out of arbitral proceedings with Reliance. It reiterated its previous ruling that since the seat of arbitration was shifted to London, and the arbitration agreement was governed by English law, India's Arbitration Act, 1996 would not apply.

Relevant : Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A. and Anr. MANU/SC/0185/2002 National Thermal Power Corporation v. Singer Co. MANU/SC/0146/1993 Venture Global Engineering v. Satyam Computer Services Ltd. and Anr. MANU/SC/0333/2008

Tags : ARBITRATION   JURISDICTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved