Indian Arbitration Act - Judgment Search Results
In Re: Indian Arbitration Act; in Re: Babaldas Khemchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1919
Reported in: (1920)22BOMLR842; 57Ind.Cas.997
is a petition by the 1st defendant partner for stay of the suit under Section 19 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899, on the ground that the partnership agreement included a submission to arbitration.3. The submission is in Clause … Kanga contends that the submission providing for a reference to three arbitrators is outside the scope of the Indian Arbitration Act and that the Court has no jurisdiction to stay the suit under Section 19.5. It has recently been
In Re: Indian Arbitration Act
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1919
Reported in: (1921)ILR45Bom1
is a petition by the 1st defendant partner for stay of the suit under Section 19 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899, on the ground that the partnership-agreement included a submission, to arbitration.3. The submission is in Clause 12 … Kanga contends that the submission providing for a reference to three arbitrators is outside the scope of the Indian Arbitration Act and that the Court has no jurisdiction to stay the suit under Section 19.5. It has recently been
In Re: Indian Arbitration Act
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-28-1908
Reported in: (1908)10BOMLR351
No doubt Rule 75, Clause (v), provides that ' applications in all matters arising under' amongst others 'the Indian Arbitration Act may be disposed of by a Judge in Chambers '. There is however a proviso to the clause … Spellers & Baker, Limited, and Leetham & Sons [1897] 1 Q.B. 312. I have no such power. The Indian Arbitration Act leaves it to the discretion of the arbitrators to state a special case or act as they choose.
18-section briefs on any result in this list
In Re: the Indian Arbitration Act (ix of 1899)
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jan-10-1916
Reported in: 35Ind.Cas.3
contract.'5. In Hutcheson v. Eaton (1884) 13 Q.B.D. 861 : 51 L.T. 846 it was held that the arbitrator had no jurisdiction to decide on custom inconsistent with the terms. In that particular transaction the plaintiffs alleged … knew of the alleged custom. There is a clear distinction between Sections 230 and 236 of the Contract Act. The latter Section deals with the case of a person falsely contracting as agent. He is not, entitled
In Re: the Indian Arbitration Act of 1899;
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Dec-09-1919
Reported in: 59Ind.Cas.439
September 1919 in respect of the execution of the awards.2. On the 24th June 1918 Baijnath applied for arbitration in respect of difference due to him from Allibhoy Mahomed on Advise Notes Nos. 23 and 31 and
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free