Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Appeal Dismissed Upholding Arbitration, Joint Hindu Family Business Karta, Contract Forms = Arbitration Agreement

        Gaddarmal Hiralal And Anr. Versus Chandrabhan Agarwal And Co.

        Gaddarmal Hiralal And Anr. Versus Chandrabhan Agarwal And Co. - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Whether Roshan Lal, defendant No. 2, was the karta of the joint Hindu family and hence the karta of the joint family business carried on in the name of Messrs Gaddarmal Hira Lal, defendant No. 1Rs.
        2. Whether Messrs. Gaddarmal Hira Lal had entered into the transactions which are now to be referred to arbitration in accordance with the byelaws of the Agra Merchants' Chambers, Ltd. AgraRs.
        3. Whether the agreement, if any, amounts to an arbitration agreementRs.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Karta of the Joint Hindu Family:
        The court examined whether Roshan Lal was the karta (manager) of the joint Hindu family business carried on in the name of Messrs Gaddarmal Hira Lal. Roshan Lal contested that he was not the karta, asserting his father Hira Lal held that position. However, the court found that Roshan Lal acted as the karta, as evidenced by his actions and a vakalatnama where he signed as the karta. The court concluded that despite Hira Lal being alive, Roshan Lal could act as the karta due to his father's old age. Thus, the transactions undertaken by Roshan Lal were binding on the defendant-firm.

        2. Transactions Entered by Messrs. Gaddarmal Hira Lal:
        The court evaluated whether Messrs. Gaddarmal Hira Lal had entered into the transactions to be referred to arbitration under the byelaws of the Agra Merchants' Chamber. The plaintiff's case was that the defendants entered into forward transactions by retaining or signing contract forms, which included a clause for compulsory arbitration. The court found that the defendants had a prior agreement with the plaintiff firm, where non-return of contract forms would signify acceptance of transactions. This mode of acceptance had been acted upon in previous transactions. The court held that the defendants' conduct in not returning the contract forms amounted to acceptance of the proposal, thereby entering into the transactions.

        3. Arbitration Agreement:
        The court examined whether the agreement between the parties amounted to an arbitration agreement. Section 2(a) of the Arbitration Act defines an arbitration agreement as a written agreement to submit present or future differences to arbitration. The court noted that the initial agreement was oral, but the subsequent non-return of contract forms, which contained a clause for compulsory arbitration, amounted to a written agreement. The court referenced previous cases to support the view that implied acceptance through conduct (non-return of forms) could constitute a valid arbitration agreement. Thus, the court concluded that the contract forms, even though not signed, amounted to an arbitration agreement as they contained a clause for compulsory arbitration.

        Conclusion:
        The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's decision to refer the disputes relating to the 'Laha' transactions to arbitration under the byelaws of the Agra Merchants' Chamber. The court found that Roshan Lal acted as the karta of the joint Hindu family business, the defendants had entered into the transactions, and the non-return of contract forms constituted an arbitration agreement. The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the stay order was vacated.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found