Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Cyfuture India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Futuretimes Technology India Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interim orders and arbitrator appointment (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. efficacy of remedies under section 9 and 17 (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. referral of petitions to the arbitrator (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. continuance of interim orders and obligations (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 17) |
| 5. respondent's failure to appear (Para 16) |
(Video-Conferencing)
1. Ad interim orders already stand passed in favour of the petitioner.
2. Subsequently, applications have been filed in these petitions before this Court, inter alia, for modification of the ad interim order in OMP (I) (COMM) 130/2021.
3. An arbitrator already stands appointed in both these matters and the next date of hearing before the learned Arbitrator is stated to be 30th September, 2021.
4. In these circumstances, Section 9 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("1996 Act", in short) would ordinarily proscribe this Court from continuing with these proceedings, which ought to be relegated for decision by the learned Arbitrator as proceedings under Section 17 of the 1996 Act. The only exception is if "circumstances exist, which may not render the remedy provided under Section 17 efficacious".
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
