Search results
RESPONDENT: R.K. SORAL DATE OF JUDGMENT13/04/1988 BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J) BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J) RANGNATHAN, S. CITATION: 1988 AIR 1205 1988 SCR (3) 527 1988 SCC (2) 508 JT 1988 (2) 204 1988 SCALE (1)788 ACT: Arbitration Act, 1940. Section 20-Arbitration agreement-Duty of Court to direct filing of-Whether obligatory.
tulsi singh and others (a.i.r. 1940 patna 121). Whether in any particular case there was a complete novation of a contract in the sense that the new contract replaced or substituted the old contract, could depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case.
R.N.Kumar B. N. KIRPAL, J. (1) THIS is an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act in which it is, inter alia, prayed that there was an arbitration agreement between the parties and the same should be filed in Court and the disputes arising between the parties be referred for arbitration in terms thereof.
r.k.soral respondents. cited judgements :-mithilesh kumari vs. govt of national capital territory of delhi [laws(dlh)-1999-8-128] [referred to] jayndra s shah vs.
R.N. Kumar Vs. R.K. Soral [1988] INSC 105 (13 April 1988) Mukharji, Sabyasachi (J) Mukharji, Sabyasachi (J) Rangnathan, S. CITATION: 1988 AIR 1205 1988 SCR (3) 527 1988 SCC (2) 508 JT 1988 (2) 204 1988 SCALE (1)788. ACT: Arbitration Act, 1940. Section 20-Arbitration agreement-Duty of Court to direct filing of-Whether obligatory. Indian Contract ...
R.N. Kumar vs R.K. Soral on 13 April, 1988 Showing the contexts in which revival of contract appears in the document Change context size
In that view of the matter, the single Judge of the High Court, in our opinion, rightly directed that the first agreement be filed. The Division Bench of the High Court pointed out after referring to the letter dated 19/21st September, 1985 the Motion Pictures Association confirmed that in view of the failure of the producer to comply with his earlier letter regarding payment of Rs.
