TL;DR

1. 1A construction company had a contract to build an office, but after bankruptcy issues, it only got a small fraction of what it was owed—about ₹8.82 lakh out of ₹12 crore.
2. 2The company that hired them says all debts were settled in the bankruptcy plan, but the construction firm now claims they deserve more money for work done before the bankruptcy.
3. 3The court must decide if the construction company can seek arbitration to recover this extra money they think they deserve.

TL;DR

1. 1Farmers in Fazilka, Punjab, had their land taken for a drainage canal project.
2. 2The compensation offered for their land varied significantly between villages, causing disputes.
3. 3Farmers argue that compensation should be equal for everyone affected in these villages.

TL;DR

1. 1A contractor was hired by Chhattisgarh for roadworks but was later accused of wrongdoing in earlier projects.
2. 2Chhattisgarh attempted to reclaim over ₹84 lakh from the contractor's current projects without prior notice.
3. 3The contractor contested this, arguing it violated contract terms and didn't follow legal procedures.

TL;DR

1. 1A clean energy company and an innovation firm disputed points in their franchise agreement.
2. 2The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator based on the agreement's arbitration clause, sparking a jurisdiction clash.
3. 3The energy company argued the arbitration should be in Goa, as per the agreement's jurisdiction clause.

TL;DR

1. 1Hardev Construction submitted a bid for a railway project, paying bid security through an e-payment system.
2. 2The Ministry of Railways rejected the bid because the original paper copy of the payment wasn't submitted.
3. 3Hardev argues their digital receipt should suffice since the funds were received; the ministry insists on a physical copy.