https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281518 A foreign-award enforcement application under Section 47 was treated as governed by the Limitation Act, with Article 137 applying because the award becomes a decree only after the court records enforceability under Section 49; delay was condoned on sufficient cause. An objection based on breach of a Section 9 injunction failed because the injunction order was held without jurisdiction and could not invalidate enforcement or support a public policy challenge. The Court also held that only the severable component representing loss said to be suffered by a non-party subcontractor was unenforceable as contrary to Indian indemnity principles and public policy, while the balance of the award remained enforceable. en-us Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Jun 2019 16:47:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281518 A foreign-award enforcement application under Section 47 was treated as governed by the Limitation Act, with Article 137 applying because the award becomes a decree only after the court records enforceability under Section 49; delay was condoned on sufficient cause. An objection based on breach of a Section 9 injunction failed because the injunction order was held without jurisdiction and could not invalidate enforcement or support a public policy challenge. The Court also held that only the severable component representing loss said to be suffered by a non-party subcontractor was unenforceable as contrary to Indian indemnity principles and public policy, while the balance of the award remained enforceable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281518