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

1998 Supreme(AP) 966

N.Y.HANUMANTHAPPA, NEELAM SANJIVA REDDY
A. RAMASWAMY – Appellant
Versus
K. RAMA MURTHY – Respondent


N. Y. HANUMANTHAPPA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the order and decree dated 31-7-1992 passed in I. A. No. 1271/91 in O. S. No. 471/90 on the file of the IV Addl. Judge, City civil Court, Hyderabad, rejecting the application filed by the appellants herein under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

( 2 ) THE reference of the parties in this appeal has been mentioned as arrayedbefore the Trial Court.

( 3 ) ORIGINALLY this appeal was filed by the appellants 1 to 5 (defendants 1to 5) against respondents 1 to 2 (plaintiffs 1 and 2 ). During the pendency of this appeal 1st appellant-lst defendant and 1st respondent-lst plaintiff died. Hence, appellants 6 to 11 were brought on record as legal representatives of the 1st appellant-1stdefendant and respondents 3 to 10 were brought on record as legal representatives of the 1st respondent-1st plaintiff.

( 4 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 filed I. A. No. 1271/91 in O. S. No. 471/90 undersection 34 of the Arbitration Act to stay the proceedings pending before the iv Addl. Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on the ground that the dispute is covered by the arbitration agreement. In this matter an Arbitrator has been appointed who entered upon







































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