Supreme Court: Non-Signatory That is Not a Veritable Party Cannot Invoke an Arbitration Clause  ||  SC: Bail Can't be Cancelled For Police Non-Appearance Once Chargesheet is Filed and Trial is Attended  ||  SC: New Arbitration Bill Fails To Provide a Statutory Appeal Against Tribunal Termination Orders  ||  SC: Employees Who Resign or Retire After Five Years of Service Are Entitled to Receive Gratuity  ||  SC: Employees Who Resign or Retire After Five Years of Service Are Entitled to Receive Gratuity  ||  Supreme Court: Higher Courts Should Avoid Unnecessary Remand of Cases to Lower Courts  ||  J&K&L HC: Under SARFAESI Act, Borrower's Right To Redeem a Secured Asset Ends With Auction Notice  ||  Calcutta HC: Income Tax Returns Can Be Used to Assess Victim's Income; ?39 Lakh Compensation Granted  ||  Delhi HC: Woman's Right to a Shared Household Does Not Allow Indefinite Occupation of In-Laws' Home  ||  Delhi HC: Director Disputes in a Company Do Not Qualify as Genuine Hardship to Delay ITR Filing    

Madras HC: Section 34 Proceedings Are Summary in Nature; Does Not Permit Additional Evidence - (29 Apr 2022)

ARBITRATION

Madras High Court has ruled that the challenge proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are summary in nature, hence, no additional document shall be allowed to be brought in at that stage unless absolutely warranted.

Tags : MADRAS HIGH COURT   SECTION 34   ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT   1996   ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved