Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. NITIN JAMDAR, CJ, MR. SYAM KUMAR V.M., J
LAZAR CHAKKOLA – Appellant
Versus
SUDARSANAN PILLAI.G – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute arises from a partnership arrangement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. claimants argue for non-arbitrability and limitation. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. defendants counter non-arbitrability and limitation claims. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. court emphasizes limited review scope in arbitration appeals. (Para 29 , 35) |
| 5. arbitrator's findings on agreements affirmed. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 41) |
| 6. partnership dissolution concluded as reasonable. (Para 43 , 44 , 46 , 47) |
| 7. interference justified only in cases of legal error. (Para 58 , 59) |
| 8. arbitral award dismissed, no grounds for interference. (Para 62) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 17th day of December, 2025
Syam Kumar V.M., J
This Appeal is filed challenging the order dated 03 September 2022 in O.P. (Arb) No.35 of 2021 of the Principal Sub Court/Commercial Court, Kollam. The said O.P. was filed challenging the arbitration award dated 30 March 2017 of the learned Arbitrator in ARC No.7 of 2014, whereby the claim preferred by the 1st Respondent claimant was allowed in part.
2. Appellants herein were the petitioners in the said OP (Arb).
They were Respondents 1 to 4 and 6 to 11 and legal representatives of the dece
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
