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

2004 Supreme(SC) 1334

RUMA PAL, P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD – Appellant
Versus
PANCHAMY PACK (P) LTD. – Respondent


ORDER

1. LEAVE GRANTED.

2. THE APPELLANT HAS IMPUGNED THE ORDER DATED 26-8-2003 BY WHICH THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT HAS DISPOSED OF A WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION. WHILE REFUSING TO ENTERTAIN THE WRIT PETITION ITSELF ON THE GROUND THAT DISPUTED FACTS WERE INVOLVED, THE HIGH COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING ORDER:

"AFTER GIVING ANXIOUS CONSIDERATION TO THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE REFERRED TO ARBITRATION UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996. WE APPOINT SHRI M.R. HARIHARAN NAIR, RETIRED JUDGE OF THIS COURT, RESIDING IN HOUSE NO. TC 36/711(1), PARIJATHAM, K.V. HOUSING PERUNTHANNI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR TO DECIDE THE DISPUTE TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT. P-9. THE ARBITRATOR SHALL FIX HIS TERMS AND CONDITIONS WITH THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT AND THE ARBITRATOR SHALL COMPLETE ARBITRATION WORK WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ENTERING APPEARANCE."

3. THE NAMED ARBITRATOR ASSUMED JURISDICTION ON THE BASIS OF THIS ORDER AND HELD TWO SITTINGS IN WHICH VARIOUS DIRECTIONS WERE GIVEN. THE RESPONDENT HAS FILED ITS STATEMENT OF CLAIM BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. THE APPELLANT IS YET TO FILE ANY STA











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