Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Sunday, 20 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2016-06-29 allowed

Emm Enn Associates vs Commander Works Engineer & Ors

Bench: 2 — Ashok Bhushan

In Brief

A contractor claimed disputed portions of a final bill over three years after work completion, but within five years. The High Court rejected the arbitration application, treating it as time-barred. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the claim was a 'live claim' requiring arbitration. The Court noted that payment on 10.04.2001 explicitly covered only the undisputed portion, with disputed claims remaining unadjudicated. A Chief Justice can reject claims only when evidently time-barred; here, detailed examination of relevant documents was needed—a matter for the Arbitral Tribunal, not for preliminary rejection. The case was remitted for arbitrator appointment."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Arbitration Limitation Contract Law Section 11 Arbitration Act Dead Claim vs Live Claim Judicial Review of Arbitration Applications

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login