Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.28 seconds)Deep Narain Singh And Ors. vs Mt. Dhaneshwari And Ors. on 10 September, 1959
In the subsequent proceedings initiated on the same arbitration agreement,
therefore, it is not open to the appellant to contend that the first award
was set aside only on ground of breach of natural justice and not on the
ground of its invalidity that the sisters were not parties to the
arbitration agreement and not bound either by agreement of sale or fixation
of price at the instance of the brothers. [See Chhabba Lal v. Kunna Lal,
AIR (1946) PC 72; Deep Narain Singh v. Mt. Dhaneshwari, AIR (1960) Patna
201; Patanjal v. Rawalpindi Theatres Pvt. Ltd., AIR (1970) Del 19; Narsing
Das v. Gogan Ram Lachmi Narain, AIR (1955) Punj.
Draupadibai And Ors. vs Narayan Masanu Sutar And Ors. on 28 January, 1985
31 and Draupadibai v.
Narayan Masanu Sutar, AIR (1985) Karnataka 258].
M/S. India Umbrella Manufacturing Co. & ... vs Bhagabandei Agarwalla (Dead) By ... on 5 January, 2004
As an alternative argument the counsel submitted that although sisters were
not parties to the arbitration agreement, the brothers represented them as
their agents. Reliance is placed on Dhannalal v. Kalawatibai, [2002] 6 SCC
16 and India Umbrella Manufacturing Co. v. Bhagabandei Agarwalla, [2004] 3
SCC 178.
Patanjal And Anr. vs Rawalpindi Theatres (P) Ltd. on 9 April, 1969
In the subsequent proceedings initiated on the same arbitration agreement,
therefore, it is not open to the appellant to contend that the first award
was set aside only on ground of breach of natural justice and not on the
ground of its invalidity that the sisters were not parties to the
arbitration agreement and not bound either by agreement of sale or fixation
of price at the instance of the brothers. [See Chhabba Lal v. Kunna Lal,
AIR (1946) PC 72; Deep Narain Singh v. Mt. Dhaneshwari, AIR (1960) Patna
201; Patanjal v. Rawalpindi Theatres Pvt. Ltd., AIR (1970) Del 19; Narsing
Das v. Gogan Ram Lachmi Narain, AIR (1955) Punj.
Abdul Kadir Shamsuddin Bubere vs Madhav Prabhakar Oak on 20 September, 1961
The decision, however, in that case seems to have been based on the nature
of dispute involved with regard to the right of cutting trees in forests in
which the parties had proprietary share. There were two agreements and to
the first agreement, the party left out in the second agreement was a
party. The nature of dispute which arose under the partnership agreement
for cutting trees in the forests was found to be such which could have been
decided even without one of the co-sharers being a party to the second
agreement. It is on the above facts, it was held that arbitration award
eventually made would not be unenforceable. This Court, therefore, in that
case took a view that such an arbitration agreement which leaves out one of
the parties interested can still be ordered to be filed under section 20 of
the Act for the purpose of initiating arbitration proceedings.
Juggilal Kamlapat vs General Fibre Dealers Ltd (And ... on 12 December, 1961
Reliance is placed on Juggilal Kamplapat v. General Fibre Dealers Ltd.,
[1962] Supp 2 SCR 101.