M/s Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. vs Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation and Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

18 April 2018

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 4017 of 2018

Result

Disposed

Bench

Adarsh Kumar Goel, R.F. Nariman

Citation

[2018] 4 S.C.R. 260 : 2018 INSC 360

Headnote

Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983:

s. 2(d) – Expression “ascertained money” occurring in s. 2(d) will include not only the amount already ascertained, but also the amount which may be ascertained during the proceedings. s. 4(3)(iii) – Qualification of Member of Arbitration Tribunal – Held: An employee of a party to the dispute cannot be an arbitrator – Therefore, State of Madhya Pradesh not to appoint its employee of the concerned department, as member of the Arbitration Tribunal. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and Ors. vs. Raja Transport Private Ltd. (2009) 8 SCC 520 : [2009] 13 SCR 510 – relied on.

The following Order of the Court was passed: ORDER 1. Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Our attention has been drawn to the definition of “dispute” under Section 2(d) of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (“1983 Act”) which is as follows: “‘dispute’ means claim of ascertained money valued at Rupees 50,000 or more relating to any difference arising out of the execution or non-execution of a works contract or part thereof.” 3. We consider it appropriate to clarify that the expression “ascertained money” as used in Section 2(d) of the 1983 Act wil

View Subscription Plans →