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

1999 Supreme(P&H) 797

S.S.SUDHALKAR
Parampal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Punjab State Ware House Corpn. , Chandigarh – Respondent


Judgment

1. By the impugned order, learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Phul stayed the suit filed by the appellants and the matter was ordered to be referred to the Arbitrator for adjudication. Being dissatisfied with the order, this appeal has been filed.

2. The first contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the certified copy of the Arbitration Agreement was not produced by the respondents along with the application for referring the matter to the Arbitrator. It is the contention of both the learned counsel for the parties that the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "1996" Act) apply to the present case. Section 8 of the 1996 Act reads as under :

"8. Power up to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement :-

(1) A judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall, if a party so applies not later than when submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute, refer the parties to arbitration. (2) The application referred to in sub-section (1) shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied b



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