Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.33 seconds)The Arbitration Act, 1940
Section 41 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in The Delhi High Court Act, 1966 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 10 in The Delhi Police Act, 1978 [Entire Act]
Rebati Ranjan Chakravarti vs Suranjan Chakravarti And Ors. on 4 February, 1963
(22) It has already been stated hereinabove that an arbitration court does not have power to issue an injunction away from the provisions contained in Section 41(b) of the Act; still if it exercises such power it would be in purported exercise of power conferred by Order Xxxix and S. 94 of the CPC. The arbitration court would be deemed to have exercised a power not vested in it and hence an appeal would lie against such an order under Order 43 Rule l(r) CPC. The expression "and from no others" as used in Section 39(1) of the Arbitration Act refers to orders under the Arbitration Act only ( see- Rebati Ranjan v. Suranjan and Jhamaklal v. Mishrilal Air 1957 Mb 22 and Sri Krishen v. Radha Kishan ).
Section 5 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The Delhi High Court Act, 1966
H.M. Kamaluddin Ansari And Co. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 12 August, 1983
(23) The contents of Ia 7955/95 filed by the appellant seeking the injunction and contents of Ia 9753/95 filed by the respondent seeking vacating of the injunction go to show that the order of injunction forming subject matter of this appeal was for the purpose of and in relation to the arbitration proceedings. To be so the order of injunction must be relatable to the subject matter of arbitration proceedings, as is deductible from para 19 of the Supreme Court decision in M/s Hkk Ansari & Go's case (supra). The power to grant such an injunction was wielded by the learned single Judge by exercising jurisdiction under the Arbitration Act only by reference to Section 41(b) read with the Second Schedule Entry No.4. The order of injunction, was an order under the Arbitration Act and so would be the order vacating the same and impugned herein. An appeal there against is clearly prohibited and certainly not permitted by Section 39 of the Arbitration Act. The appeal is, therefore, incompetent and deserves to be dismissed as not maintainable.