Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

M/S SARDAR CONSTRUCTION CO. versus STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided
25 January 1999
Judges listed
SUJATA V. MANOHAR, R.C. LAHOTI (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[1999] 1 S.C.R. 233 · 1999 INSC 23
Not shown
2 other citation strings that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

The award in the present case, though given prior to 1.1.1994 which is the date of commencement of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 1992, had not attained finality at the time when the said Act came into force. Under Section 21 of the said Act, the provisions of the Arbitration Act shall, insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, cease to apply to any dispute arising from a works contract and all arbitration proceedings in relation to such dispute before an arbitrator, umpire, Court or authority shall stand transferred to the Tribunal. In the present case, the arbitration proceedings in relation to the dispute were pending before the court and hence the High Court has rightly transferred these proceedings to the Tribunal. Under Section 8 of the said Act on reference to the Tribunal, the Tribunal has to make an award which shall be deemed to be a decree within the meaning of Section 2 of Civil Procedure Code! 1908 and it shall be executed accordingly.

pp. 233–234, margin F

We, therefore, agree with the reasoning and ccnclusion of the High Court. The S.L.P. is dismissed. T.N.A. Petition dismissed.

p. 234, margin A