SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 290

D.P.MOHAPATRA, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Vishnu Tulsidas Sipahimalani – Appellant
Versus
Kanta Suresh Sipahimalani – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.B. Majmudar, J.-Leave granted.

2. We have heard the appellant in person and learned counsel for the respondent.

3. This appeal arises from the common judgment and order of the High Court in two arbitration petitions whereunder it has been found that the prayer for supercession of the arbitrator as moved by the present appellant could not be granted. Thus the Arbitration Petition No. 242 of 1997 filed by the appellant was rejected by the High Court, but the Cross-Arbitration Petition No. 239 of 1997 which was filed by the respondent for extension of time to be granted to the arbitrator to make the award was granted.

4. A few facts leading to this appeal may be noted at the outset.

On 20th October, 1985, a Deed of Partnership was executed between the parties and one Rajan Tulsidas Sipahimalani, to carry on business of running a Restaurant. The business was carried on in the name of M/s Cactus Restaurant and Bar, situated at Shanti Centre, Sector 17, Vashi, New Bombay. Subsequently, Rajan Tulsidas Sipahimalani retired from the partnership and business was continued by the present parties. In connection with the said business, dispute arose and, therefore, it appears that the ap















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top