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

1922 Supreme(All) 165

PIGGOTT, WALSH
Kedarnath Moti Lal – Appellant
Versus
Messrs. Sukhamal Bansidhar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Piggott, J. - This is an application to file an award, dated November 22nd, 1920, made in connection with a trade dispute between two firms upon a private submission and an arbitration conducted without the intervention of the Court. The defendant-firm is the same as in eases Nos. 1 and 2 to day decided by us, and the facts of the dispute are broadly similar. Here also, the award is that' of an umpire appointed by the Committee of the Delhi Piece Goods Association after the arbitrators chosen by the parties had failed to agree. There are two points upon which the present case is distinguishable from those above referred to:

(i) The order placed by the defendant-firm with the plaintiff firm was embodied in seven indents; the letters of acceptance in respect of two of these are not forthcoming, but in each of the remaining five letters the form of words employed is as follows:

"We have to intimate that your indents have been accepted by wire and the same are subject to revision and confirmation by mail." The qualifying expression, "if required," to which I attached considerable weight in deciding the connected eases, is not to be found here: though we do not know for certain th

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