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

1981 Supreme(Bom) 128

LENTIN
Gangaram Ratanlal – Appellant
Versus
Simplex Mills Co. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
V.V. Tulzapurkar, for Petitioner; D.H. Mehta, for Respondent.

ORDER :- This in an utterly mala fide petition for setting aside an award.

2. New Textiles Ltd. were the sole selling agent of the respondent. By certain contracts entered into between the petitioner and the respondent's selling agent, the petitioner agreed to purchase certain quantities of yarn of the total value of Rs. 2,40,761.77 subject to the terms and conditions contained in the respondent's printed contract form. Clause 21 in the respondent's printed form provided for reference of disputes to arbitration in the following words: -

"All disputes and questions whatsoever which shall arise between the parties hereto out of or in connection with this agreement or as to the construction or application thereof or the respective rights and obligations of the parties her under or as to any clause or thing herein contained or any account or valuation to be made hereunder as to any other matter in any way relating to these presents shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with the rules of the Millowners' Association, Bombay, for the time being in force regulating arbitration with respect to piece-goods."

However, no such arbitration clause was specifically incorporated in the 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