Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANU, J
SAJID PASHA – Appellant
Versus
ABDUNNASIR P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners are individuals seeking arbitration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners challenge the rejection of their arbitration request. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. submission on various judgments for support. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's previous rulings outlined the scope of review. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. review limited to procedural errors, not substantive ones. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. assessment of annexure a3 and its clarity. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. court emphasizes the limitations on substantive reviews. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 8. arguments need to remain within the framework of established law. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 9. review petition ultimately dismissed. (Para 18) |
ORDER
12.12.2025, have filed this review petition.
3. The petitioners have produced some documents along with the present review petition to contend that the disputes between the parties were clear to each of them, as the same were communicated in clear terms through the additional documents now produced. Further it is contended that under Section 21 of the Act, the only requirement is a notice/request seeking arbitration. Petitioners state that Annexure A3 produced with the memorandum of arbitration request fulfilled the said purpose and hence the order rejecti
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
