In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court has held that "The Arbitration and Conciliation Act", 1996 has been drafted according to the UNCITRAL model law. The Act and the model law are however not identical and therefore the judgements and the literature thereon cannot be taken as a guide to the interpretation of the Act, 1996:

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court has held that "The Arbitration and Conciliation Act", 1996 has been drafted according to the UNCITRAL model law. The Act and the model law are however not identical and therefore the judgements and the literature thereon cannot be taken as a guide to the interpretation of the Act, 1996: Correct Answer Kokan RailwayCorp. Ltd vs. Rani Construction (P) Ltd.

Related Questions

In which of the following cases it was held by the Supreme Court that Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would have no application to International commercial arbitrations held outside India and therefore such awards would only be subject to the jurisdiction of Indian courts when the same are sought to be enforced in India in accordance with Part II of the said Act?
In a suit for specific performance of an Agreement of Sale of immovable property the defendant along with his written statement files an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act for referring the parties to arbitration in accordance with arbitration clause contained in the Agreement to Sell. The plaintiff admits the existence of the arbitration clause as well as that the subject matter of suit is subject matter of such arbitration clause. The Court shall:
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court passes judgment in a matter. In a later case before a high court, a party presents the Supreme Court judgment as a binding authority. The opposing party claims that the high court is not bound by the Supreme Court's judgment because relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in that case. Which of the following is most correct in this case?
Principle: Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.