Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.20 seconds)
Sandeep Kumar Nahata vs Praveen Kothari on 5 August, 2025 cites

A. Ayyasamy vs A. Paramasivam & Ors on 4 October, 2016

7] Mr. A Dhar, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand place reliance of the judgement of A. Ayyasamy vs. A Paramasivam and Others reported in (2016) 10 SCC 386. Referring to the said judgment Mr. Dhar submits that where there are allegations of serious fraud then reference to arbitration is not required to be taken recourse to. This allegation of fraud can only be determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction.
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 360 - A K Sikri - Full Document

M/S N.N. Global Mercantile Private ... vs M/S Indo Unique Flame Ltd. on 25 April, 2023

15] Coming to the issue of arbitrability in view of the allegations and counter allegations made between the parties alleging fraud and forgery, this aspect of the matter has also been settled by the Apex Court in Interplay between Arbitration and Agreements (supra) and subsequently, decided and followed in other judgments as well as the judgments of the Apex Court rendered in N.N. Global Mercantile Private Ltd vs. Indo Unique Flame Limited and Others reported (2021) 4 SCC 379. In the said matter, the Apex Court clearly held that all civil and commercial disputes either contractual or non- contractual which can be adjudicated upon by Civil Court, in principle, can be adjudicated and resolved through arbitration, unless it is excluded either expressly by a statute or by necessary implications. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not exclude any category of dispute as being non arbitrable. The Apex Court went on to set down certain forms of disputes which are considered to be non-arbitrable disputes such as (i) relating to rights and liabilities which give rise to or arise out of criminal offences, (ii) matrimonial disputes relating to divorce, judicial separation, restitution of conjugal rights and child custody, (iii) matters of guardianship, (iv) insolvency and winding up, (v) testamentary matters, such as the grant of probate, letters of administration and succession certificates; and (vi) eviction or tenancy matters governed by Page No.# 11/12 special statutes where a tenant enjoys special protection against eviction and specific courts are conferred with the exclusive jurisdiction to deal with the dispute.
Supreme Court of India Cites 229 - Cited by 104 - K Joseph - Full Document

Datar Switchgears Ltd vs Tata Finance Ltd. & Anr on 18 October, 2000

16] In the facts of the present case, the allegation of fraud is still under investigation and no charges have yet been filed against the respondent on the basis of the FIR lodged by the petitioner. That apart, the Apex Court as well as this Court has time and again held that the jurisdiction of the arbitrator is fairly wide and it is open to the arbitrator to even consider the arbitrability of any dispute. The referral Court's jurisdiction in the matter of arbitration is extremely limited. All the referral Court is required to do is to examine the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. Unless the dispute which are sought to be referred for arbitration are specifically excluded under any statute or in the agreement itself, the question of arbitrability of any or all of the disputes are to be left open to be decided by the arbitrable tribunal itself. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the contentions raised by the respondent are not tenable and the same are therefore rejected. Since the respondent did not respond to the notice dated 29.11.2024 issued under the Section 21 of the Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996, within the period prescribed, the respondents are denuded of their right to appoint an arbitrator as has been held by the Apex Court in Datar Switchgears Ltd. Vs. Tata Finance Ltd. reported in (2000) 8 SCC 151. Under such circumstances, this Court under the authority given under the Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appoints Shri Mrinmoy Kumar Bhattacharjee, retired District and Sessions Judge, Assam to be appointed as an arbitrator to decide the disputes arising between the parties. This appointment is prospective subject to furnishing of Page No.# 12/12 written declaration as required under Section 12 (1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A copy of this order be marked to Shri Mrinmoy Kumar Bhattacharjee, retired District and Sessions Judge, Assam by the Registry of this Court. The parties are also permitted to furnish a copy of this order and the place it before Shri Mrinmoy Kumar Bhattacharjee, retired District and Sessions Judge, Assam.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 557 - M J Rao - Full Document
1   2 Next