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

2015 Supreme(Ker) 1277

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
T. P. Daison – Appellant
Versus
Varghese Jose T. – Respondent


ORDER :

Petitioners are husband and wife. Respondents 1 and 2 also are husband and wife. All of them are partners of three firms. Disputes arose between the petitioners on the one side, and the respondents 1 and 2 on the other. The 3rd respondent Chartered Accountant, who was auditor of both parties, attempted to settle the disputes. It resulted in their executing Ext P1 agreement dated 27.12.2012, by which they appointed the third respondent their arbitrator to decide disputes that might arise between the parties as to the implementation of the agreement. There was an understanding that the third respondent would not continue to work as the auditor of both parties. Later, a dispute arose between the two parties. On 6.6.2014 the first petitioner sent Ext P2 letter to the third respondent requesting him to enter on arbitration. On 16.6.2014 the former sent Ext P3 reminder to him. By Ext P4 notice he informed both parties that the arbitration proceedings would be conducted on 19.7.2014. Thereafter, the petitioners learnt that the third respondent continued to work as the auditor of respondents 1 and 2. At the instance of the third respondent the other respondents filed O.S.No.172 of 2





































































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