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

2005 Supreme(SC) 1285

S.N.VARIAVA, TARUN CHATTERJEE
SAMEER BARAR – Appellant
Versus
RATAN BHUSHAN JAIN – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard parties.

3. Even if the civil court felt that, because of the arbitration clause the b suit was not maintainable, it could have treated the application to be one under Section 9. We are told that Arbitration Application No. 384 of 2005 has already been filed before the Chief Justice for appointment of an arbitrator by the respondents. We, therefore, direct that pending the appointment of an arbitrator and for three weeks thereafter, the appellants will not be dispossessed from the premises in their possession. The appellants to then C apply to the arbitrator for interim orders.

5. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

6. No order as to costs.

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