Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.40 seconds)Section 44 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Dresser Rand S.A vs Bindal Agro Chem Ltd And K. G. Khosla ... on 12 January, 2006
In view of the same, reliance placed
by the respondent on Dresser Rand S.A (supra) is wholly
misplaced and cannot be applied to the case on hand where
the parties have arrived at a concluded contract.
Section 48 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 7 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Smita Conductors Ltd vs Euro Alloys Ltd on 31 August, 2001
In my view, the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was right in placing reliance upon
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Smita Conductors (supra).
Section 46 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 49 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Hari Shanker Jain vs Sonia Gandhi on 12 September, 2001
"While dealing with the similar question, the Supreme Court
in the case of Hari Shanker Jain v. Sonia Gandhi,
MANU/SC/0551/2001 : AIR2001SC3689 held that under
Section 57(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the Courts
in India are required to take judicial notice of, inter alia, all
laws in force in the territory of India. Foreign laws are not
included therein. Under Order 6 Rule 2 of C.P.C., every
pleading shall contain a statement in concise form of the
material facts relied on by a party but not the evidence nor
the law of which a Court may take judicial notice. But the
rule against pleading law is restricted to that law only of
which a Court is bound to take judicial notice. As the Court
does not take judicial notice of foreign law, it should be
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:37:41 :::
30/36 ARBP-174.12.sxw
pleaded like any other fact, if a party wants to rely on the
same. The Supreme Court further went on to observe that it
has no manner of doubt that in the Courts in India, a point of
foreign law is a matter of fact and, therefore, a plea based on
a point of foreign law must satisfy the requirement of
pleading a material fact in the petition fact in the petition
filed before the Court. If foreign law is a matter of fact and
is required to be proved as any other fact, then the question
is who should establish that fact. In my considered view,
obviously, the person who is alleging or seeking ouster of
the jurisdiction of the Court based on the interpretation of
the clauses in the agreements applying the English law."