Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ALOK ARADHE
Shameem Sultana Khan – Appellant
Versus
Faizunnissa Begum – Respondent
ORDER :
ALOK ARADHE, J.
Mr. K.R.Raman, learned counsel representing Mr. Rahul Sarella, learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr. R.Sushanth Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 6.
2. This application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed seeking to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties as per Clause 19 of the Partnership Deed dated 01.04.1994.
3. Facts giving rise to filing of this application briefly stated are that a Partnership Deed was executed on 01.04.1994 between the applicant and respondent Nos.1 to 6, who are members of the family. Clause 19 of the aforesaid Partnership Deed contains an arbitration clause. The applicant sent a legal notice on 08.11.2022 to respondent No.3 and M/s.Syed and Syed, Chartered Accountants to provide information, clarification and documents in relation to the firm by e-mail. Thereafter another notice dated 03.01.2023 was issued to each of the respondents by registered post calling upon them to furnish the documents, information and clarification related to the firm. A reply notice on behalf of the respondents was sent on 12.01.2023 wherein the claim of the applic
The court established that parties must adhere to arbitration as per the arbitration clause in the Partnership Deed, affirming the arbitrator's jurisdiction over disputes arising from the partnership....
Partnership dissolution disputes must be adjudicated in civil court; arbitration is not a viable remedy until a court validates the dissolution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the bar imposed under Section 69 of the Partnership Act, 1932, does not apply to arbitration proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliatio....
The main legal point established is that if a contract contains an arbitration clause and the Arbitrator has not been appointed, the High Court is required to appoint an Arbitrator for resolution of ....
The main legal point established is that the ban under Section 69 of the Partnership Act, 1932 does not apply to arbitration proceedings, and the existence of a dispute and the invocation of the arbi....
The court reaffirmed that the scope of inquiry under Section 11 is limited to determining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, and the withdrawal of a prior application does not con....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of minimal judicial intervention in the arbitral process, emphasizing the competence of the arbitrator to decide all preliminary issu....
The court held that an arbitrator can be appointed to resolve disputes within a partnership agreement, including dissolution matters, provided the application is timely and properly invoked.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute amongst the partners regarding the dealings of the firm could be referred to arbitration as per the partnership deed, but once the....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
