Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J
SALLY THERMOPLASTIC INDIA LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
LEARNING LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application filed under the arbitration and conciliation act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. overview of arbitration proceedings and arbitrator's health issue. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding claim amounts and termination of proceedings. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. court's observation on the impossibility of proceeding further. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. clarification on the application process for extensions. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. final conclusion on the maintainability of the application. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER
2. Heard Mr.K.Venkatraman, learned counsel for applicant and Mr.Thriyambak J. Kannan, learned counsel for respondent.
4. In the year 2025, the applicant engaged the present counsel and instructed him about the developments. The new counsel, who represented the applicant, seems to have informed the sole Arbitrator that he is coming by way of change of vakalath and he wanted to file the vakalath before the sole Arbitrator. The sole Arbitrator, through e-mail dated 20.05.2025, informed that he is in a position to continue as an Arbitrator and requested the parties to obtain suitable directions by means of extension of time to complete the arbitration proceedings. It is under these circumstances, th
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
