Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The question that falls for consideration in this case is whether on the death of a named arbitrator, the arbitration agreement survives or not.2. At the very outset, let us refer to the relevant arbitration clause in the agreement dated 16.12.1989, which reads as follows:21. If any question or difference or dispute shall arise between the parties hereto or their representatives at any time in relation to or with - respect to the meaning or effect of these presents or with respect to the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto then such question or dispute shall be referred either to Mr. N.A. Palkhivala or Mr. D.S. Seth, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on both the parties.(emphasis added)3. The petitioner submits that both Shri N.A. Palkhivala and Shri D.S. Seth are no more and therefore the arbitration clause in the agreement does not survive. It was pointed out that Shri N.A. Palkhivala was named in the agreement since he was the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)2SCC188; 2012CriLJ954; AIR2012SC847
1. The instant controversy emerges out of a double murder, committed on the night intervening 15-16.5.2008. On having found the body of Aarushi Talwar in her bedroom in house no. L-32, Jalvayu Vihar, Sector 25, Noida, her father Dr. Rajesh Talwar got a first information report registered at Police Station Sector 20, Noida, on 16.5.2008. In the first information report Dr. Rajesh Talwar pointed the needle of suspicion at Hemraj, a domestic help in the household of the Talwars. On 17.5.2008 the dead body of Hemraj was recovered from the terrace of the same house, i.e., house no. L-32, Jalvayu Vihar, Sector 25, Noida, where Aarushis murder had also allegedly been committed.2. The initial investigation into the double murder was carried out by the U.P. Police. On 29.5.2008 the State of Uttar Pradesh handed over the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as, the CBI), thereupon investigation was conducted by the CBI. 3. During the course of investigati...
Tag this Judgment!