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

1994 Supreme(Cal) 361

SATYABRATA SINHA, SHREE RANG MISRA, VIDYA NAND
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
K. Satyanarayan & Co. – Respondent


Judgment

Sinha, J.

This matter has been referred to the Full Bench by a Division Bench of this Court for answering the following questions of law:-

"1. Does the Arbitration Act, 1940 permit an appeal under Section 39(1) of the said Act from an Order directing reference of the disputes to an Arbitrator not appointed under the Arbitration Agreement not agreed to by the parties when the Court by an earlier Order already directed filing, of the said Arbitration Agreement and directed reference to an Arbitrator against which no appeal has been preferred?

2. If the answer to the above question is in the negative, is such an order appealable as judgment under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent ?

3. Does an appeal lie from an Order passed under the Arbitration Act, in case not covered by Section 39(1) of the said Act, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent where no question of jurisdiction involved?

4. Was the case of (1) Messrs Unit Construction Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. v. University of North Bengal, reported in 1986 (2) Calcutta High Court Notes 275 correctly interpreted the decision of Supreme Court in Babulal Khimji's case, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1786 and the case of the (3) Union of India v. Mohindra









































































































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