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

2005 Supreme(SC) 593

G. P. MATHUR, R. C. LAHOTI
P. K. RAMACHANDRAN – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The Court of Subordinate Judge, Emakulam has directed an award made under the Arbitration Act, 1940 to be made rule of the court overruling the objections preferred thereagainst. The objectors (respondents before us) preferred an appeal in the High Court of Kerala at Emakulam. The Division Bench, which heard the appeal, formed an opinion that the cause of action relating to the subject-matter of arbitration and award could be said to have arisen only in the districts of Kollam or Pathanamthitta or Idukki and not in Emakulam. If the subject-matter of arbitration would have been sought to be filed as a suit, it could never have been in a court at Emakulam. In the opinion of the High Court, the hearing and the decree made by the Court of Subordinate Judge were vitiated for want of territorial jurisdiction. For this reason alone, the High Court set aside the decree and directed that either the award be returned to the arbitrator or all the proceedings be transferred to the competent court at Kottarakkara. The claimant has come up in appeal by special leave.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the view taken by the High Co




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