Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.59 seconds)Section 30 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Garikapatti Veeraya vs N. Subbiah Choudhury on 1 February, 1957
In Garikapati Veeraya v. Subbiah Choudhry, (S) the Supreme Court laid down that the right of appeal was a vested right and accrues to the litigant as on and form the date the lis commences, that cause would be governed by the rights then prevailing, and a subsequent legislation providing for a right of appeal could not clothe either party to the earlier lis with that right. This proposition is not seriously in dispute. That would certainly be the ordinary rule of law, and the Supreme Court observed in the cited case that,
"such a right (of appeal) is to be governed by the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit of proceeding, and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal"
Heeralal Agarwalla And Co. vs Joakim Nahapiet And Co. Ltd. on 27 April, 1927
Hence, it cannot be said that the introduction of a right of appeal in the by-laws after the claim was submitted to arbitration takes away this remedy from either party. Upon the effect of a contract of this kind, Heeralal Agarwalla and Co. v. Joakim Nahapiet and Co. Ltd., AIR 1927 Cal 647 is of particular significance. That was a case in which according to the contract between the parties, a dispute was refereed firstly to Arbitrators, then to an umpire, and then to a committee of appeal form him. The learned Judge observed, on this aspect:
1