04/10/2024

The word “examine” occurring in Section 11 (6A) of the Arbitration Act intends that the Referral Court has to make a scrutiny for the existence of the arbitration agreement and the said expression does not employ the contested inquiry – Haresh Nagjibhai Ramani and Ors. Vs. Uday Dineshchandra Bhatt and Ors. – Gujarat High Court

Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that the issues non-arbitrability of the dispute or whether the fraud alleged permeates the whole arbitration agreement making it impossible for the arbitral tribunal to adjudicate the dispute are outside the limited scope of inquiry at the pre-referral stage under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The word “examine” occurring in Section 11 (6A) of the Arbitration Act intends that the Referral Court has to make a scrutiny for the existence of the arbitration agreement and the said expression does not employ the contested inquiry – Haresh Nagjibhai Ramani and Ors. Vs. Uday Dineshchandra Bhatt and Ors. – Gujarat High Court Read Post »

While exercising the powers under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Judicial Authority has no power to appoint an Arbitrator and the appointment shall be made only in terms of Section 11 – Mrs. M. Ranjani and Anr. Vs. Mrs. R. Usha Rani and Ors. – Madras High Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

While exercising the powers under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Judicial Authority has no power to appoint an Arbitrator and the appointment shall be made only in terms of Section 11 – Mrs. M. Ranjani and Anr. Vs. Mrs. R. Usha Rani and Ors. – Madras High Court Read Post »

Suit relating to Commercial nature particularly IPR and Trademarks suits, the Courts have to be vigilant while examining the plaint for valuation | Whether Section 15(4) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 would applicable to the suits which were already registered as Commercial suits and later transferred to Dedicated Commercial Court or not? – Sri Narasu’s Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Narasu’s Saarathy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. – Madras High Court

Hon’ble Madras High Court held that it is the duty of the Courts to verify as to whether the suits is valued properly and if the suit is undervalued then the Trial Court can direct the plaintiff to rectify the mistakes and to value the suit properly. As far as the suit relating to Commercial nature particularly IPR and Trademarks suits, the Courts have to be vigilant while examining the plaint for valuation. If the valuation is less than 3 lakhs then the Commercial Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the suits as Commercial Suit.

Suit relating to Commercial nature particularly IPR and Trademarks suits, the Courts have to be vigilant while examining the plaint for valuation | Whether Section 15(4) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 would applicable to the suits which were already registered as Commercial suits and later transferred to Dedicated Commercial Court or not? – Sri Narasu’s Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Narasu’s Saarathy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. – Madras High Court Read Post »

Whether a suit seeking specific performance of contract is maintainable before the Civil Court or the suit itself is barred by Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act? | Debt Recovery Tribunal has no jurisdiction to enforce specific performance of contract? – S.S. Agro Bio-Tech Flour Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Arvind Singh and Ors. – Jharkhand High Court

Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court held that:

(i) DRT has no jurisdiction to enforce specific performance of contract.
(ii) The enforcement of security interest by the bank/secured creditor is subject to conditions of the account being declared non-performing asset and there is complete uncertainty as to whether the bank would at all invoke measures provided under section 13 of the SARFAESI Act for recovery of its debt.
(iii) The bar of the Civil Court under section 34 of SARFAESI Act applies only to such matters which can be adjudicated by Debt Recovery Tribunal including the action as and when taken for enforcement of security interest in terms of section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act.

Whether a suit seeking specific performance of contract is maintainable before the Civil Court or the suit itself is barred by Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act? | Debt Recovery Tribunal has no jurisdiction to enforce specific performance of contract? – S.S. Agro Bio-Tech Flour Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Arvind Singh and Ors. – Jharkhand High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top