https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261412 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, confirming the majority view of the Arbitral Tribunal that there was no privity of contract between ONGC and the appellant. ONGC was not liable to make payments to the appellant; the responsibility rested with the respondent. The appeals were allowed, directing the respondent to make the necessary payments to the appellant. The absence of a direct contract between ONGC and the appellant precluded any liability on ONGC's part, emphasizing the arbitration agreement was strictly between the appellant and the respondent. en-us Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261412 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, confirming the majority view of the Arbitral Tribunal that there was no privity of contract between ONGC and the appellant. ONGC was not liable to make payments to the appellant; the responsibility rested with the respondent. The appeals were allowed, directing the respondent to make the necessary payments to the appellant. The absence of a direct contract between ONGC and the appellant precluded any liability on ONGC's part, emphasizing the arbitration agreement was strictly between the appellant and the respondent. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261412