M/S ESSEL INFRA PROJECTS LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ACTING THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

M/S ESSEL INFRA PROJECTS LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ACTING THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

Timelines for disposal of proceedings under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 are not mandatory but must be kept in mind by all concerned. The Chief Justice of the High Court may take steps if these timelines are not followed, and statutory amendments may be considered if timelines cannot be achieved to...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: M/S Essel Infra Projects Ltd. Through its Authorized Representative; Respondent: State of Madhya Pradesh Acting Through its Director
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Order/disposal
Outcome
Appeal disposed of with directions
Legal Topics
Timeliness in Disposal of Arbitration Proceedings, Role of Tribunal and High Court in Monitoring Delays, Statutory Amendments for Speedy Dispute Resolution
Arbitration Administrative Law Timeliness in Disposal of Arbitration Proceedings Role of Tribunal and High Court in Monitoring Delays Statutory Amendments for Speedy Dispute Resolution

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S Essel Infra Projects Ltd. Through its Authorized Representative

Appellant

State of Madhya Pradesh Acting Through its Director

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Order/disposal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether directions are required for timeliness in disposal of proceedings under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983

Ratio Decidendi

Timelines for disposal of proceedings under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 are not mandatory but must be kept in mind by all concerned. The Chief Justice of the High Court may take steps if these timelines are not followed, and statutory amendments may be considered if timelines cannot be achieved to provide remedies at any other appropriate forum.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of with directions

Orders

  • State to monitor timeliness of proceedings under the M.P. Act, 1983
  • Reasonable time for disposal may be considered as one to two years