M/S Badri Vinimay Private Limited v. Mmtc Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Delhi set aside a Single Judge's order issuing limited notice against an arbitral award without reasoning. The court noted the lack of recorded reasons for rejecting part of the challenge but clarified that the Single Judge could issue a limited notice after stating reasons. Appeal against 110-day delay was condoned.
What did the court decide?
The impugned order of March 18, 2015 is set aside; the appeal is disposed of with 110 days delay condoned.
What the court decided
$~4
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- FAO(OS) 463/2015
M/S BADRI VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Jayant Mehta, Advocate with Ms.Pratiksha Sharma, Advocate
versus
MMTC LIMITED ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Sanat Kumar, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 15.02.2016
CM No.15449/2015
For the reasons stated in the application 110 days’ delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
The application is disposed of.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the single judge erred in issuing limited notice without recording reasons for rejecting part of the challenge to the arbitral award.
Whether the condonation of 110 days delay in filing the appeal should be granted.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
M/s Badri Vinimay Private Limited
- respondent
MMTC Limited
Coram
Pradeep Nandrajog
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court