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

1949 Supreme(Bom) 21

TENDOLKAR
Nuruddin Abdulhusein – Appellant
Versus
Abu Ahmed Abdul Jalli – Respondent


Advocates:
H.D. Banaji - for Plaintiff. Murzban J. Mistree - for Defendant.

Judgement

ORDER :- This is a notice of motion for stay of the suit on the ground that there is a valid agreement for reference to arbitration. It is resisted on the plea that the defendant has taken a step in the proceedings in that he has filed an unconditional appearance in Court. The question for decision, therefore, is whether filing of an unconditional appearance is a step in the proceedings.

2. Such a question has not arisen for determination either in England or in India for the simple reason that both under S. 4, English Arbitration Act, and under S. 19, Arbitration Act of 1899, a step in the proceedings taken "at any time after appearance" disqualifies the defendant from applying for stay, with the result that, whether or not filing of an appearance was a step in the proceedings, it was manifestly inarguable that it prevented the defendant from applying for a stay of the suit. Section 34, Arbitration Act of 1940, which takes the place of S. 19 of the Act of 1899, omits the words "at any time after appearance" and the relevant words of the section now are :

"Any party to such legal proceedings may, at any time before filing a written statement or taking any other steps in the

























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