Source: https://www.lawweb.in/2017/12/what-is-scope-of-interference-of-higher.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 05:54:41+00:00

Document:
Law Web: What is scope of interference of higher court during arbitration proceeding?
that has been provided by the legislature to a litigant.
in the matter in a different manner.
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. V M/s Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd.
for adjudication to Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B.
Sinha, retired Judge of this Court.
retired Judge of this Court.
pronounce the judgment in terms of the award.
Bharat Construction Company (2)3 .
reasons, a litigant should not be deprived of the same.
Skelton (P) Ltd.5 and Guru Nanak Foundation v.
orders. That is how the matter has been placed before us.
counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. K.V.
Viswanathan, learned senior counsel for the respondent.
assigned a different meaning depending on the context.
authorities in Commissioner of Gift Tax, Madras v.
Skelton (supra) and Whirlpool Corporation v.
and others v. Ludhiana Steels Private Ltd.14.
delivered to the Sole Arbitrator Mr V.S. Desai.
arbitration award could be validly filed.
the award should be filed before the Delhi High Court.
filed but it was finally resolved in the decision in CT. A.
will have jurisdiction to entertain the same.
Court alone had the jurisdiction for filing of the award.
Court in Union of India v. Surjeet Singh Atwal16.
render the provision contained in Section 31(4) otiose.
two awards and requested for issue of notices thereon.
well as on the original side of the High Court of Calcutta.
first application has been already made.
first application relating to the matter is filed.
case of, in the matter, affair, or province of.
of reference to an arbitrator can be made.
Calcutta High Court in Choteylal Shamlal v.
Cooch Behar Oil Mills Ltd.
Bhattacharya18 and Basanti Cotton Mills Ltd. v.
have earlier referred to Saith and Skelton (supra).
has been passed solely on the basis of an earlier order.
meaning of “Court” under Section 2(1)(e) of the 1996 Act.
“court” for the purpose of Section 2(1)(e).
Section 37 of the Act, would not be available.
under Article 136 would also not be available.
Sections 30 and 33 of the Act.
related to reference under Section 20 of the Act.
“21. In Ct. A. Ct. Nachiappa Chettiar v. Ct. A.
trial Judge requesting to refer the matter to arbitration.
reference was a result of undue influence or coercion.
passed in terms of the award.
what does the word “Court” mean in relevant provision.
trial court as contended by the appellants.
reached when a final judgment is pronounced.
in practice create unnecessary complications.
stay of the proceedings before the trial court.
court was competent to act under Section 21.
proposition that has been laid down in the said decision.
correct understanding of the principle stated in CT. A.
47. Section 31 deals with the jurisdiction of the Courts.
applications made during the pendency of an arbitration.
or disputes that find mention in Article 262(1).
the tribunal, would not have any manner of application.
manner of use, distribution and control of water.
different meaning. (See State of Maharashtra v.
Indian Medical Assn.24 and Pandey & Co.
necessary intendment and not otherwise.
we have also been commended to the authority in A.R.
the provisions of Article 32 of the Constitution.
of the land and cannot be exercised otherwise.
conferment of jurisdiction on the High Courts.
Development Co. it has been stated.
56. In Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society, Nagpur v.
expressed in Nahar Industrial Enterprises Limited v.
Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation29.
can raise in a proceeding in an originating summons.
shall be decided on their own merits.
terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

References: v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.