The appeal preferred before the Division Bench against the judgment of the learned Single Judge was also dismissed.
In the year 1988, the appellant herein entered into an agreement with respondent No.2, wherein it was, inter alia, agreed that the appellant shall maintain the companymunity viewing sets in the seven States of North Eastern region, i.e. Assam, Meghalaya, Arunacahal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura.
2004 2 SCR 199 The following Order of the Court was delivered The appellant herein is a companypany registered under the Indian Companies Act.
The appellant filed the said Award before the High Court of Delhi on its original side, for being made Rule of the Court.
As per the companytract, it is alleged that the respondent agreed to pay Rs.
The appellant alleges that they have performed the work on their part, but the respondent did number pay to the appellant for the work done by them.
66,20,040 annually, which was payable to the appellant at the beginning of each calender year and also to raise infrastructure.
Simultaneously, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Broadcasting and Information.
It is against the said judgment, the appellant is in appeal before us by way of special leave petition.
It is under such circumstances, the dispute was referred to the Arbitrator for resolution.
After the aforesaid order was passed by the Appellate Authority, the High Court on its original side rejected the application of the appellant for making the Award as Rule of the Court on the ground that the Award itself has been set aside.
The Arbitrator gave an Award dated 18th June, 1990.
The Secretary, Ministry of Broadcasting and Information set aside the Award and remitted the same to the Arbitrator for fresh resolution.
The agreement was for maintenance of 5000 VHP and DR sets for a period of five years.
