NDLI: M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1940 – ss.30 and 33 – Jurisdiction of Courts Arbitration Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Arbitration Act, 1940 (10 of 1940)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Issue for consideration: Award made in favour of the appellantcontractorwas challenged by the respondent-State u/s.30, 33, ArbitrationAct, 1940 and was set aside by Courts below inter alia holding that theclaim was time-barred – Legality.Arbitration Act, 1940 – ss.30 and 33 – Jurisdiction of Courts –Scope:Held: A claim crystallizes upon the issuance of the fi nal bill whichin this case was on 14.12.1992 – Contractor’s complaint with respect topayment was fi rst aired in 1988; the rejection resulted in an appeal beforethe higher authority, who never rendered his opinion or decision – Evenin 1993, (after the fi nal bill was drawn), no decision was given – Thus, theclaim before the civil court for the appointment of the arbitrator made inJanuary, 1995 was within the period of limitation – Further, on facts, thequestion of claims not being within the contracted period, i.e., within the30-day time granted after foreclosure of the contract, does not arise – Onaccount of the inordinate delay (in the decision by the authorities, resultingin fi ve extensions of time by mutual consent), the contractor voluntarilysought foreclosure – That request was acceded to – Originally, the periodof completion of the contract/works was eighteen months – The requestfor foreclosure, therefore, was deemed reasonable by the department andaccepted upon receipt of the appellant contractor’s letter dated 06.04.1990– Thus, there could have been no objection to delay in submission of theclaim for dispute resolution or arbitration given the department itself sat overthe request for settlement of disputes for more than 6 years – The scope of jurisdiction of a court, u/ss.30/33 never extended beyond discerning if theaward disclosed an “error apparent on the face of the award” which is an“error of law apparent on the face of the award and not an error of fact – Inthe present case, the award did not facially disclose any error of law; damageswere awarded in accordance with principles embodied in law, and thefi ndings were based on the evidence placed before the tribunal – Impugnedjudgment and the judgment of the trial court set aside – Award restored.Arbitration – Arbitration award – Interference – Duty of Courts:Held: While adjudging whether an arbitration award calls forinterference, Courts have to be conscious that the arbitrator is the solejudge of facts; unless an error of law is shown, interference with theaward should be avoided.Arbitration – Irregularity alleged making claim untenable:Held: There is no merit in the respondent-State’s submission thatthe record became defective and procedurally the claim became untenablebecause the tribunal was not informed and the appellant did not bring allheirs of the original contractor on the record – This irregularity was curedbecause the trial court’s judgment had arrayed all legal representativesof the deceased.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 751
Petitioner	M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner
Respondent	Govt. Of Maharashtra And Ors
SCR	[2023] 11 S.C.R. 367
Judgement Date	2023-08-22
Case Number	6107-6108

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Maharashtra Vs. M/s. S.d. Shinde and Co.

J. Kodanda Rami Reddy Vs. State of A.p. & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs. M/s. Neelam Engineering & Construction Company

M/s Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. M/s Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.

Secretary to The Govt. of Orissa & Anr. Vs. Sarbeswar Rout

M/s Subhash Aggrawal Agencies Vs. M/s Bhilwara Synthetics Ltd. and Ors.

Food Corporation of India Vs. M/s. Chandu Construction and Anr.

M/s. Ravindra Kumar Gupta & Company Vs. Union of India

Sudarsan Trading Co. Vs. Govt. of Kerala & Anr.

M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors

M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Maharashtra Vs. M/s. S.d. Shinde and Co.

J. Kodanda Rami Reddy Vs. State of A.p. & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs. M/s. Neelam Engineering & Construction Company

M/s Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. M/s Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.

Secretary to The Govt. of Orissa & Anr. Vs. Sarbeswar Rout

M/s Subhash Aggrawal Agencies Vs. M/s Bhilwara Synthetics Ltd. and Ors.

Food Corporation of India Vs. M/s. Chandu Construction and Anr.

M/s. Ravindra Kumar Gupta & Company Vs. Union of India

Sudarsan Trading Co. Vs. Govt. of Kerala & Anr.

M/s. S.d. Shinde Tr. Partner Vs. Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors