Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PUNJAB HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BOARD versus M/S LAKSHMI CEMENT, & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Punjab Housing Development Board v. M/s Lakshmi Cement, & Anr. - CR-3470-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 11211 (27 November 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No. 3470 of 2005

Date of Decision: 1.12.2006

Punjab Housing Development Board ...Petitioner Vs.

M/s Lakshmi Cement, & Anr. ...Respondents CORAM Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma
Present: Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr.Tavinder Singla, Advocate,

for respondent No.1.

Vinod K.Sharma, J. (Oral)

By way of present revision petition the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the learned Trial Court as affirmed by the learned lower Appellate Court making the award rule of the Court.

It is not in dispute that the Arbitrator passed a non-speaking award wherein the claim petition qua the excise duty and railway receipts has been accepted and a award for a sum of Rs.1,54,108.37P has been passed in favour of the respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the learned courts below have erred in law in making the award rule of the Court which was contrary to the terms of the contract. The contention of CR No.3470 of 2005 (2)

the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, is that the award having been passed against the specific terms of the contract amounted to misconduct on the part of the Arbitrator.; I find no force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The arbitrator has admittedly passed a non-speaking award and therefore, it is not open to the Court to probe into the mind of the Arbitrator and come to a different conclusion. Even otherwise, there is nothing in the award which could support the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the same is against the terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties.

Therefore, there is no merit in the revision petition, which is accordingly, dismissed.

(Vinod K.Sharma)

1.12.2006 Judge

rp


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.