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

1951 Supreme(All) 69

BIND BASNI PRASAD, MUSHTAQ AHMAD
KAMTA PD. NIGAM – Appellant
Versus
RAM DAYAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Bishambhar Dayal, S.C.KHER, Shankar Sahai Varma

MUSHTAQ AHMED, J.

( 1 ) THESE are appeals, each filed by a particular party, Under Section 39, Arbitration Act, against orders one Under Section 14 and the other Under Section 33 of the Act.

( 2 ) THE applt. is a teacher and author of certain books. The resp. 1 is a publisher who undertook to print and publish those books on condition of payment of royalty at a certain percentage. The respt. 2 is related to resp. 1 as his son. The remaining resps. 3 and 4 were the arbitrators.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the case of the applt. the publishers had printed and published extra copies by printing wrong dates on them to avoid detection by the applt. who having come to know of this filed a complaint against the publishers. Pending the complaint, on 11-10-1945, there was an agreement between the parties that the matter in dispute would be refd. to the arbitration of two persons, and accordingly the complaint was got dismissed the following day. As one of the arbitrators had declined to act, another agreement on the same lines was executed by the parties on 30-10-1945. The agreement inter alia provided that the entire matter was left to the arbitrators for their "decision" and that they would "look




















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