CHAKRABARTI, LAHIRI, S.R.DASS, P.B.MUKHARJI, BACHAWAT
SAHA AND CO. – Appellant
Versus
ISHAR SINGH KRIPAL SINGH AND CO. – Respondent
( 1 ) THE facts out of which this Reference to a Full Bench has arisen, have been set out in full in the Order of Reference. Briefly stated, they are that after the notice of the filing of an award made against the Appellants had been served on them, they made an application to the Court which contained three prayers. Their case being that the alleged award had been made by a body other than the body named in the arbitration agreement, they prayed that the existence, validity and the effect of the alleged agreement upon which the award bad been made, might be determined by the Court, that it might be declared that there was no valid, binding, effective or subsisting agreement between the parties and that the purported award might be set aside. The learned trial Judge treated the application, so far as it asked for the first two reliefs, as an application under Section 33, Arbitration Act and held it to be barred by limitation; but he allowed the appellants to withdraw the application, so far as it was an application under Section 33, without however, granting them leave to make a fresh, application under the section. As to its third prayer, the application was
Shree Meenakshi Mills v. Patel Brothers
Louis Dreyfus and Co. v. Arunachala
Ruby General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pearey Lal Kumar
Dwarkadas and Co. v. Daluram Goganmull
Referred to : Bajanglal Ladhuram v. Ganesh Commercial Co. Ltd.
Sassoon and Co. v. Ramdutt Ramkissendas
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.