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

2011 Supreme(Ker) 745

P.Q.BARKATH ALI
M/S. Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Balaji – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S.R. Dayananda Prabhu, Advocate.
For the Respondents: -----------

Judgment :

1. As a common question is involved, these three writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. Challenge in these writ petitions are the orders of the District Court, Kozhikode directing the revision petitioners to pay the balance stamp duty on the award passed by the Arbitrators at Udupi in Arbitration proceedings which were transmitted by the District Court, Udupi to the District Court, Kozhikode for execution.

2. Writ petitioners are the petitioners in arbitration proceedings A.P.No.257/2003, A.P.37/2000 and A.P.14/2001 respectively before the Arbitrators, Udupi, Karnataka state. In the above arbitration proceedings awards were passed on 05/06/2003, 21/07/2001 and 09/06/2001 respectively which have become final under Section 35 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Ext.P1 in all these writ petitions are the copies of the said awards. Petitioners filed applications under Section Order 21 Rule 11 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 along with the original of Ext.P1 award before the District Court, Udupi for enforcement of the award and to transfer the same to the District Court, Kozhikode for









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