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

1962 Supreme(All) 88

K.B.ASTHANA, B.MUKERJI
HAZI RAHMETULLA – Appellant
Versus
CHAUDHARI VIDYA BHUSAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.N.Katju, Jagdish Mohan Pant

MUKERJI, J.

( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision has been referred to a Bench by a learned Single Judge. The order of the learned Single Judge indicates that he has made the reference to a larger Bench for the disposal of the revision, even though he has formulated three points which, in his view, merited consideration for the purposes of the determination of the revision on the merits.

( 2 ) THE three questions which the learned Single judge formulated were, to quote his words:-"

1. Whether in a case, where a party files the award along with his application, it can make an application under Section 17 of Arbitration Act for making the award a rule of the Court, without making a prayer for the filing of the award as required by Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act?

2. Whether Article 178 of the Limitation Act applies to? such a case?

( 3 ) IF it does, whether in the present case the flung of the petition in the Court of the Munsif amounted to prosecuting a remedy with due diligence under Section 14 ot the Indian Limitation act and the period should have been condoned under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act?" 3. In order to appreciate the points which the learned Single Judge stated, it is


























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