Search Results for "Special Tribunal jurisdiction"

4213 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 4213 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition to Set Aside Termination of Arbitral Proceedings and Constitute New Arbitral Tribunal Under Sections 9 and 14 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Delay Condoned Due to Sufficient Cause Shown by Legal Heirs of Deceased Partner.

The petitioners, Neeta Lalit Sanghavi and Hemanshu Lalit Sanghavi, are the legal heirs of the deceased partner, Lalitkumar Vanmalidas Sanghavi. They f...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision That Appellate Tribunal Has Implied Power to Stay Penalty Recovery Pending Appeal. Section 254 Income-tax Act's Appellate Jurisdiction Includes Incidental Power to Grant Stay to Prevent Frustration of Appeal.

The matter arose from penalty proceedings under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Income Tax Officer imposed penalties on the assessee, M.K. Mohammed Kunh...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Upholding Autonomy Amidst Settlement Disputes Exploring Legal Principles and Precedents in Arbitration Law

This Judgment pertains to a legal discussion surrounding arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, particularly focusing on the re...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Arbitral Tribunal's Jurisdictional Order as Not Maintainable. Remedy Lies Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 After Final Award.

The petitioner, Tirupati Shopping Centre Premises Co-op. Society Limited, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of Indi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Petition Under Section 14, Setting Aside Arbitrator's Order Dismissing Substitution Application. Arbitrator's Termination of Proceedings on Grounds of Delay Held Perverse, Amounting to Refusal to Perform Functions and Not an Interim Award Under Section 34.

The dispute arose from a partnership firm where the original claimant, father of the petitioners, had initiated arbitration proceedings in 2004. After...