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

D.K.JAIN, AJIT BHARIHOKE, V.K.JAIN
AFTAB SINGH – Appellant
Versus
EMAAR MGF LAND LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ankur Talwar, Ms. Sonam Sharma and Ms. Srishty Kaul, Advocates, for the Complainants in CC No. 701 of 15; Mr. Sangram S. Saron, Advocate, for the Complainants in CC No. 1423 of 2015; Mr. Rahul Rathore and Ms. Kudrat Sandhu, Advocates Along with Mr. Arun Monga, Complainant in person, for the Complainants in CC No. 782 of 16; Mr. Sushil Kaushik and Ms. Himanshi Singh, Advocates, for the Complainants in CC Nos. 159, 423 to 433, 521 to 524, 665 and 666 of 16; Mr. Rajeev Kumar Jha and Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sharma, Advocates, for the Complainants in CC No. 99 of 2016; Mr. C.P. Sharma, Advocate, for the Complainants in CC No. 673 of 2016; Mr. Iggu Chitiappa, Advocate, for the Complainants in CC No.728 of 2016; Mr. Amarjit Singh Chandhioke, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Narain, Mr. Arnav Narain, Ms. Anushree Narain, Mr. Arjun Jain, Mr. Mishra Raj Shekhar, Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Ms. Sweta Kakkad, Ms. Arveena Sharma and Mr. Anupam, Advocates, for the Opposite Party in CC No.728 of 2016

ORDER

1. These applications and the consequential reference to a larger Bench are triggered by the amendment to Sub-Section (1) of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the "Arbitration Act") by Act 3 of 2016, with retrospective effect from 23.10.2015. The question for consideration before this Bench is profound, having seminal ramifications for the entire adjudicatory mechanism envisaged for settlement of consumer disputes, falling within the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the "Consumer Act").

2. In order to bring into focus the issue involved in these hotly contested Applications, we deem it appropriate and expedient to reiterate the history and essence of the referral order dated 31.08.2016, passed by the Learned Single Member, especially since both sides have pressed into service certain observations from the said order, dated 31.08.2016, in support of their respective stands.

3. The Opposite Party in the Original Complaints (for short, "the Builder") filed this set of captioned applications under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act praying therein that the parties be referred to Arbitration as per the Buyers' Agreements executed

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