Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.57 seconds)Section 37 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 36 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The Arbitration Act, 1940
The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992
Rahul Bajaj vs Mangal Keshav Securities Ltd. And Anr on 15 July, 2016
16 The background so referred above and in view of the
award passed by the learned Arbitrator in the year 2014, the
Respondent's submission to direct the Appellant to make the payment
12/23
::: Uploaded on - 30/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2016 00:08:19 :::
ssm 13 nmal1861.16.sxw
in lieu of 10500 ARBL shares at the current market price, practically
after more than 14 years, is undoubtedly very harsh situation and an
important issue, which is required to be considered finally in this
peculiar facts. The issue is whether the date for valuation of the
shares should be at the time when the cause of action arose or the
date of award passed or the related period or the date of the Appellate
award/or Courts, when the basic cause of action has remained the
same. The liability of the Appellant as per the basic date of award in
the first round was 24 lakhs and odd with interest, but the liability
based upon the present market value of the shares, comes to about 14
crores. Admittedly, the matters were pending in the Courts.
Section 34 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Kanpur Jal Sansthan vs M/S Bapu Constructions on 3 January, 2014
22 As regards interim stay pending the hearing of Section 37
Appeal, the position of law is quite clear. The Supreme Court in
Kanpur Jal Sansthan and Anr. Vs. Bapu Constructions 1, considering the
provisions of Sections 36/37 of the Arbitration Act read with Order
41, Rule 5, CPC, has reiterated as under :-
M/S. Pandey & Co. Builders Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 10 November, 2006
"14 In Pandey and Co. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. State
of Bihar and Anr., AIR 2007 SC 465, it has been held
that a forum of an appellate court must be determined
with reference to the definition thereof contained in the
1996 Act. The aforesaid decision further reinforces the
conclusion that Order XLI Rule 5 in principle is
1 (2015) 5 SCC 267
20/23
::: Uploaded on - 30/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2016 00:08:19 :::
ssm 21 nmal1861.16.sxw
applicable to an appeal preferred before the High Court,
for there is no provision in the Act prohibiting the
appellate court not to take recourse to the underlying
principles of the Code of Civil Procedure as long as they
are in consonance with the spirit and principles engrafted
under the Act."