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

2002 Supreme(Del) 111

P.C.JAIN
ARUN KAPUR – Appellant
Versus
VIKRAM KAPUR – Respondent


R. C. Jain

( 1 ) THESE two appeals purportedly under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as the Act) purportedly because that is the precise question which this Court is called upon to answer, have been filed by the above named appellant against the orders/directions/findings/observations dated 19. 8. 2001 and 10. 9. 2000 made by the sole arbitrator Mr. Justice a. M. Ahmadi (former chief Justice of India) in pending arbitral proceedings in relation to certain disputes which have arisen between the parties. As an objection has been raised about the very maintainability of these appeals before this Court at the very outset, the counsel for the parties have been heard at length on this question and therefore this order is confined to the question of maintainability of the appeal under the said provision of law.

( 2 ) BEFORE coming to the real controversy between the parties, it is necessary to refer to the background leading to the orders/findings of the sole arbitrator which are sought to be assailed in these appeals. Disputes having arisen between. the parties, the parties entered into a Memorandum Of Understanding (hereinafter REFERRE























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