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

1994 Supreme(Del) 654

R.C.LAHOTI
KAMAL PUSHP ENTERPRISES – Appellant
Versus
CHAIRMAN-CUM-M. D. G. A. I. L – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.K.Sahni

R. C. Lahoti, J. (Oral)

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 seeking filing of an arbitration agreement and appointment of an arbitrator. The petition is accompanied by an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code read with Section 41 (b) and Second Schedule of the Arbitration Act seeking an injunction restraining the defendants No. 1 and 2 from enforcing a bank guarantee issued by the defendant No. 3, a bank and furnished by the plaintiff to the defendants No. 1 and 2 in connection with performance of the contract.

( 2 ) THE petition was filed on 24. 9. 94. It came up for hearing on 25. 9. 94. At the preliminary hearing it was pointed out to the counsel for the petitioner that copy of the agreement containing the arbitration clause was not filed with the petition and the petition also did not reproduce the arbitration clause on which it was founded. The court also indicated to the counsel that there was a doubt about the competence of this Court by reference to its territorial jurisdiction and before entertaining the petition and the prayer for the grant of interim relief, the court would like to hear the counsel on the














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