Back
SANJAY KUMAR, ALOK ARADHE
Bharat Kantilal Dalal (Dead) Through Lr. – Appellant
Versus
Chetan Surendra Dalal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
ALOK ARADHE, J.
These appeals call in question the correctness of orders dated 06.03.2018 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in Letters Patent Appeals, namely Appeal No(s). 320 and 372 of 2015. By the aforesaid orders, the High Court has stayed two orders passed by the learned Single Judge dated 18.12.2014 passed in chamber summons no.243 of 2014 and chamber summons (L) no.1297 of 2013 in Execution Application (L) No. 1036 of 2013. The relevant facts for deciding these appeals briefly stated are as under.
FACTS
2. The appellant is the son of late Mr. Kantilal Dalal (hereinafter, referred to as ‘father’) and nephew of late Mr. Girdharilal Dalal (hereinafter, referred to as ‘uncle’). The first respondent is the nephew of the appellant, and the son of second respondent. The other respondents are cousins of second respondent. A fracture in the joint family-steeped in business dealings, shared ventures and mutual expectations, led to discord about the accounting and distribution of family funds. To resolve the dispute with his father in relation to the family assets, the appellant sought the intervention of sole arbitrator, Shri Dilip J Thaker. The sole arbitra
Electrosteel Steel Limited (Now M/s ESL Steel Limited) VS Ispat Carrier Private Limited - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 670: This case states that "The approved resolution plan under the IBC extinguishes claims not included, rendering any arbitral award related to such claims non-executable." The language indicates a definitive legal position, but there is no indication that this case has been overruled, reversed, or criticized in subsequent rulings. Therefore, it is not categorized as bad law based solely on the provided information.
Paramjeet Singh Patheja VS ICDS LTD. - 2006 0 Supreme(SC) 1016: The case emphasizes that an arbitral award is not a 'decree' under the Insolvency Act, and concludes that an insolvency notice based on such an award cannot be sustained. Again, no subsequent treatment indicating overrule or reversal is mentioned, so it is not categorized as bad law.
Kandla Export Corporation VS OCI Corporation - 2018 6 Supreme 4: The case discusses legal interpretation regarding appeals and procedural rules but does not indicate it has been overruled or criticized. No evidence of bad law treatment is present.
Pasl Wind Solutions Private Limited VS Ge Power Conversion India Private Limited - 2021 6 Supreme 603: The case discusses enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and balances party autonomy with public policy considerations. There is no mention of it being overruled or criticized, so it is not categorized as bad law.
SUNDARAM FINANCE LIMITED VS ABDUL SAMAD - 2018 3 Supreme 198: Simply states that execution of an award can be filed anywhere in the country; no subsequent treatment info is provided.
Union of India VS Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. - 2017 0 Supreme(SC) 379: Notes that LPA does not lie against certain orders; no indication of overrule or criticism.
Sushila Singhania VS Bharat Hari Singhania - 2017 0 Supreme(Bom) 395: Simply states that the appeal is not maintainable; no subsequent treatment info is provided.
**Conclusion:** None of the cases explicitly indicate they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law based on the provided data.
None explicitly indicated. The list does not specify subsequent affirmations or consistent treatment.
Kandla Export Corporation VS OCI Corporation - 2018 6 Supreme 4: Provides clarification on the purpose of a proviso and the scope of appeals, which is a typical interpretative or clarificatory decision. No indication of subsequent treatment.
Amazon. Com NV Investment Holdings LLC VS Future Retail Limited - 2021 5 Supreme 321: Discusses the legality of Emergency Arbitrator provisions under the Arbitration Act, which appears to be a substantive legal position. No evidence of subsequent overruling.
Paramjeet Singh Patheja VS ICDS LTD. - 2006 0 Supreme(SC) 1016: Establishes that arbitral awards are not decrees under the Insolvency Act, clarifying the legal position on arbitral awards and insolvency notices.
Kandla Export Corporation VS OCI Corporation - 2018 6 Supreme 4: Clarifies procedural aspects regarding appeals under the Arbitration Act and the Act of 2015.
Union of India VS Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. - 2017 0 Supreme(SC) 379: Notes procedural limitation that LPA does not lie against certain orders.
Sushila Singhania VS Bharat Hari Singhania - 2017 0 Supreme(Bom) 395: Declares that an appeal is not maintainable, establishing a procedural limitation.
Pasl Wind Solutions Private Limited VS Ge Power Conversion India Private Limited - 2021 6 Supreme 603: Discusses enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and the balancing of party autonomy with public policy considerations.
All cases lack explicit references to being overruled, criticized, or reversed in subsequent jurisprudence.
None of the cases explicitly mention subsequent treatment such as being overruled or criticized. Due to the absence of such information, their treatment remains uncertain. The analysis relies solely on the provided text, which does not indicate any negative subsequent treatment or invalidation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
