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

1990 Supreme(Del) 269

MAHINDER NARAIN
SNLOCHANA UPPAL – Appellant
Versus
SURINDER SHEEL BHAKRI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ANUP BAGHAI, R.K.MAKHIJA

Mahinder Narain, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act has been filed for the purpose of enforcement of the agreement to sell dated 8-10-1989, executed the parties to the suit whereby the respondent is alleged to have agreed to sell plot bearing No. 0-11/41, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, to the petitioner.

( 2 ) IT is stated in this petition that in the said agreement there is an arbitration agreement between the parties. The clause relating to arbitration is in the following terms :

"that in the eventuality of any dispute in between the parties, on any matter concerning this agreement, or any matter incidental thereto, the same shall be referred to an Arbitrator appointed mutually, as per the Indian Arbitration Act, in force and the award of the Arbitrators so appointed, shall be final and binding on between the partics thereto. "

( 3 ) I had put io Mr. R. K. Makhija, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time when the matter came up for admission on 9-8-1990, that in view of the fact that the arbitration would ultimately result in specific performance of the alleged agreement to sell between the parties, whether it is permissible in law to refer the alleged




















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