Fact 3:

3. That the present appeal is liable to be dismissed on the ground that the appellant in question has not paid the fees of an arbitrator appointed by them. The casual attitude of Appellant towards the arbitral tribunal reflects that Appellant is continuously misusing the process of law and has approached the honourable court with the malafide intention of causing distress to the respondent, and thus the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Q: Describe the citation of Chandra Kumar v. Union of India in brief ?

Ans: The larger issue before the Bench was whether the orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal set up under the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 would be amenable to challenge before High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It will be noted that when the concept of tribunalisation was upheld in L Chandra Kumar v. Union of India  that the Court had unequivocally opined that the orders passed by the Tribunals would be subject to the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of Indian Constitution.  x
Read more

Q: Discuss Section 33 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ?

Ans: Section 33 of Arbitration and Conciliation act mentions about Correction and interpretation of award:  (1) Section 33(1) mentions that within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award, unless another period of time has been agreed upon by the parties— (a) a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to correct any computation errors or any clerical or typographical errors or any other errors of a similar nature occurring in the award. (b) if so agreed by the parties, a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to give an interpretation of a specific point or part of the award if it is not understood by the party.  (2) If the arbitral tribunal considers the request made under sub-section (1) to be justified, it shall make the correction or give the interpretation within thirty days from the receipt of the request and the interpretation shall form part of the arbitral award. (3)...
Read more

Q: Elaborate the relevancy of citation of Union Of India vs Major R. Metri No. Mr 08585N on 4 April, 2022 in our case ?

Ans:  Union Of India vs Major R. Metri No. Mr 08585N on 4 April, 2022 The honourable Supreme Court held that the impugned judgment and order dated 2nd March, 2017, passed by the learned AFT, convicting the appellant Major R. Metri No.08585N for the offence punishable under Section 63 of the Army Act and sentencing him to forfeiture of seniority of rank and of severe reprimand is quashed and set aside. The appellantMajor R. Metri No.08585N is acquitted of all the charges, charged with. The appellantMajor R. Metri No.08585N is directed to be reinstated forthwith with continuity of service. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant Major R. Metri No.08585N will not be entitled for backwages for the period during which he was out of employment. Relevancy with our case: In the above case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Major R. Metri, the honourable Supreme Court set aside the dismissal of Major R. Metri considering the principles of natural justice and order f...
Read more