Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The SC allowed the appeal, set aside the Division Bench judgment and the learned Judge's order, and directed enforcement of the arbitration agreement. The Court held that an arbitration agreement was concluded by conduct and email exchanges reflected in Contract No. 061-16-12115-S, notwithstanding lack of a signature by respondent, and that respondent's acceptance and performance established binding consent including clause 32.2. Invocation under s.45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was held proper; only prima facie proof of an arbitration agreement was required at the referral stage under the Kompetenz-Kompetenz doctrine, leaving substantive disputes of validity for the arbitral tribunal.
The SC allowed the appeal, set aside the Division Bench judgment and the learned Judge's order, and directed enforcement of the arbitration agreement. The Court held that an arbitration agreement was concluded by conduct and email exchanges reflected in Contract No. 061-16-12115-S, notwithstanding lack of a signature by respondent, and that respondent's acceptance and performance established binding consent including clause 32.2. Invocation under s.45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was held proper; only prima facie proof of an arbitration agreement was required at the referral stage under the Kompetenz-Kompetenz doctrine, leaving substantive disputes of validity for the arbitral tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.