Back
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Dwarkadas Himatlal Shah Thro Lhs Ripak Dwarkadas Shah D/o. Dwarkadas W/o. Hiren Rasikbhai Mandaliya – Appellant
Versus
Lhs of Decd. Girishbhai Himatlal Shah – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. J.F. Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Saurabh Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the respondents.
2. By way of present petition, the petitioner herein has challenged the order dated 16.12.2022 passed below Exh.34 by the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. The respondent No.1 preferred application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) in Civil Suit No.670 of 2022 preferred by the petitioner herein praying to the competent Court to refer the matter to the Arbitrator in view of clause 17 of one Memorandum of Understanding (for short ‘MOU’) dated 25.08.2016 executed between the father of the petitioner, father of the respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 himself.
2.1 Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.12.2022 passed by the Chamber Judge, Court No.21, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, allowing the application below Exh.34 filed by the respondent No.1 – original defendants under Section 8 of the Act, the petitioner herein has approached this Court by filing the present petition seeking following reliefs :
b. Your Lordships will be pleased t
The court emphasized strict adherence to procedural requirements for references to arbitration under the Arbitration Act, dismissing applications that do not explicitly comply.
Rejection of plaint – When a statute prescribes to do certain thing in a certain manner, the thing has to be done in same manner or not at all – All other modes are expressly forbidden.
The court established that a party does not forfeit its right to apply for arbitration under Section 8 even after the expiration of the time to file a written statement, provided there are intervenin....
Disputes capable of being adjudicated by the Civil Court are generally amenable to arbitration, unless expressly excluded. The importance of appointing an eligible arbitrator was also emphasized.
The court held that disputes regarding settled amounts are not arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, unless specifically covered by the arbitration agreement.
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
