P. CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THREE points have been urged on behalf of the appellant in this appeal, two of them more or less ordinary and one out of the ordinary. On the first of them, the learned counsel for the appellant did not himself place much reliance, as he stated to us in the end.

( 2 ) THE appeal is against an order of P. B. Mukharji, J. refusing the appellant's prayer for staying a suit brought against it by the respondent, made on the ground that the dispute involved in the suit was covered by an arbitration agreement. The learned Judge has held that neither under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, nor under Section 3 of the Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937, could the appellant have the stay prayed for. The former section was excluded, because the appellant could not be said to have been ready and willing to go to arbitration at the time of the institution of the suit. The second was excluded, because the Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act did not apply to the case at all and even if it applied, the suit could not be stayed under Section 3 of the Act, because the agreement had become inoperative and in the events which had happened, no arb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document