You may also like...
-
Contempt 1334 of 2022 filed in WP 11824 of 2020 by B. Jagannath in Thiruporur Murugan Temple and Alavandar Charities Trust Removal of Encroachment. NRR Arun Natarajan appeared for both the Respondents and the Hr and Ce Commissioner. Both Temple Executive officers appeared in person and tendered unconditional apologies in writing to the Court for not complying and implementing the order within time fixed by this Court. Furthermore the Executive officers submitted separate status reports wherein it was stated by Alavandar Charities Executive officer that
by Sekar Reporter · Published November 9, 2022
-
-
Justice PT Asha noted that there were limits to how far a Court can interfere under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when it comes to modifying an arbitral award. In this regard, she cited a 2019 Madras High Court ruling in the case of SG Novasoft Technologies Limited v. Gayathri Balusamy, wherein it was held, “A reasonable interpretation to Section 34 would only lead to an irresistible conclusion that the Court can modify or vary the Award of the Arbitrator if it is contrary to the material evidence adduced by the parties.”
by Sekar Reporter · Published May 26, 2020