JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted in SLP (C) No.31068 of 2009 and SLP (C) No.4648 of
2010.
(2.) The common question that arises for consideration by the Court in this
batch of cases is whether an order, though not appealable under section 50 of
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "1996 Act"), would
nevertheless be subject to appeal under the relevant provision of the Letters
Patent of the High Court. In other words even though the Arbitration Act
does not envisage or permit an appeal from the order, the party aggrieved by
it can still have his way, by-passing the Act and taking recourse to another
jurisdiction.
(3.) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, senior advocate, however, who led the arguments
on behalf of the appellants, would like to frame the question differently. He
would ask whether there is any provision in the 1996 Act that can be said to
exclude the jurisdiction of the High Court under its Letters Patent either
expressly or even impliedly. He would say that the jurisdiction of the High
Court under the Letters Patent is an independent jurisdiction and as long as
the order qualifies for an appeal under the Letters Patent an appeal from that
order would be, undoubtedly, maintainable before the High Court.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.