PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The SC held that Indian courts have jurisdiction to appoint arbitrators under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, despite conflicting clauses in the Distributor Agreement. While the arbitration venue was Bogota, Colombia, and procedural rules of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre at the Chambers of Commerce in Bogota applied, Clause 16.5 explicitly granted supervisory jurisdiction to Indian courts in Gujarat. The Court determined that Indian law governed the arbitration agreement's validity, scope, and interpretation, making the A&C Act applicable. Clause 18's provision that awards conform to Colombian law pertained only to arbitration proceedings and did not override Clause 16.5's stipulation that Indian law governed the agreement and disputes. The arbitration petition was allowed.
The SC held that Indian courts have jurisdiction to appoint arbitrators under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, despite conflicting clauses in the Distributor Agreement. While the arbitration venue was Bogota, Colombia, and procedural rules of the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre at the Chambers of Commerce in Bogota applied, Clause 16.5 explicitly granted supervisory jurisdiction to Indian courts in Gujarat. The Court determined that Indian law governed the arbitration agreement's validity, scope, and interpretation, making the A&C Act applicable. Clause 18's provision that awards conform to Colombian law pertained only to arbitration proceedings and did not override Clause 16.5's stipulation that Indian law governed the agreement and disputes. The arbitration petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.