Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Alok Aradhe, Sandeep V.Marne
Harkisandas Tulsidas Pabari – Appellant
Versus
Nikita Sushant Acharya Legal heir – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitration appeal facts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments by appellants and respondents. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's analysis on arbitration process. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 4. conclusion and dismissal of appeals. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep V. Marne, J.
A. THE CHALLENGE
1. These Appeals are filed by the Appellants challenging the order dated 11 October 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court allowing Arbitration Petition Nos.114 of 2006 and 119 of 2006 and setting aside the Award dated 21 September 2005 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator. By the Award, claim filed by the Appellants for specific performance of the Memorandum of Understanding was allowed by the Arbitral Tribunal.
B. FACTS
2. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 20 July 1994 was executed between the original Respondents and the Appellants under which the original Respondents Mr. Rajendra Acharya and Mr. Nandkishor Acharya agreed to sale their respective undivided shares, right, title and interest in the property situated at Paper Mill Lane, bearing City Survey Nos.1
The court upheld that for an arbitration, procedural rules must be correctly adhered to, and a Memorandum of Understanding lacking essential terms does not constitute a concluded contract for specifi....
The court does not have the authority to interdict an award on a factual issue, and it cannot substitute its own evaluation of evidence. The arbitral tribunal is the ultimate master of the quantity a....
Agreement for Sale - Arbitration - When High Court is satisfied that a party is remediless that in rarest of rare cases it will exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution and interfere w....
Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement - Only when High Court is satisfied that a party is remediless that in rarest of rare cases it will exercise jurisdiction....
No arbitration clause relating to dispute between the parties in not appointing appellant as stockist and claim of compensation towards loss of goodwill and reputation. High Court erred in proceeding....
Court held that specific performance cannot be enforced due to termination of MOU and lack of owner consent.
The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court dealing with an appeal under Section 37 against the judgment in a petition under Section 34 is more constrained than the jurisdiction of the Court dealing with....
The court upheld the Arbitrator's award on property transactions, emphasizing the necessity of permissions under applicable land laws while affirming that a plausible ruling can stand even with insuf....
The court upheld the principle that undertaking given to secure performance of contractual obligations revives a terminated contract, allowing specific performance claims despite prior termination by....
The court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to cases of patent illegality or perverse findings, respecting the finality of arbitration.
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
