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

2006 Supreme(Del) 1119

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
MOULANA ASAD MADANI – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL HAFIZ – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMIT SWAMI, ATUL KUMAR, H.K.PURI


VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.


( 1 ) BY this Judgment I shall dispose of an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') seeking the appointment of a Presiding Arbitrator, in respect of dispute which has arisen between the Applicants and the Respondent. Briefly stated, the Applicants claim 50 per cent rights over a partnership concern in which the remaining 50 per cent rights vest in the Respondent. Disputes having been arisen between the parties and legal action has been initiated by them.

( 2 ) IRONICALLY, the first to issue a notice seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator is the Respondent who addressed a notice to the several applicants in terms of the communication of Sanjay Kumar Kumar, Advocate dated 3. 2. 2005. On 27. 7. 2005 in response to this notice the applicants had conveyed the names of three suggested or proposed Arbitrators. However, in that very month the Respondent filed Suit No. OC 92 of 2005 in the Court of Civil judge, JR. Division, Islampur, Dist. Uttar Dinajpur. The Applicants herein filed a Written Statement dated November, 2005 in those proceedings. On a cursory perusal of the Written Statement it a







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