R.NARAYANA PISHARADI
Pranathmaka Ayurvedics Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Cocosath Health Products – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Is an order passed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Arbitration Act') by a Commercial Court appealable under Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commercial Courts Act')? This question essentially falls for consideration in the instant case.
2. The first petitioner is a company. The second petitioner is the Chief Executive Officer and the third petitioner is one of the directors of the first petitioner company. The first respondent is a partnership firm. The second respondent is the Managing Partner of the first respondent firm.
3. The first and the second respondents filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act in the District Court, Ernakulam against the petitioners. This application (Ext.P8) was transferred to the Commercial Court, Ernakulam (the Principal Sub Court, Ernakulam) and numbered as CMA (Arb) No.8/2020.
4. The reliefs prayed for in Ext.P8 application are the following:
Chandra Kumar v. Union of India : AIR 1997 SC 1125
Kandla Export Corporation v. M/s OCI Corporation : (2018) 14 SCC 715
Maqbool v. State of U.P : AIR 2018 SC 5101
Raichurmatham Prabhakar v. Rawatmal Dugar: AIR 2004 SC 3625
Union of India v. National Federation of the Blind : (2013) 10 SCC 772
V.H.N.D.P.Sabai v. Tuticorin Educational Society : (2019) 9 SCC 538
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.