The Single Judge disposed of the writ petition on the ground that an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, came to an end if allowed, with liberty to file revision.
Writ petition disposed of with liberty to file revision.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
wp421.11
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.421 OF 2011
_____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders |
Mr. P.M. Shah, Sr. Advocate with, Advocate for Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for petitioner.
(B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE
20.01.2011 sut/Jan11/wp421.11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition has to be dismissed in view of an application u/s 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.C. Sant
Dharmadikari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
