Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
SC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order referring the appellant to arbitration under Section 11(4). Applying the principles in Cox and Kings, SC held that the referral court's role is confined to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement and whether a non-signatory is a veritable party. On the facts, the appellant and respondent operated on "separate orbits" and no intention to bind the appellant to the contract between the other two entities was established, even prima facie. The respondent thus failed the prima facie test, and the dispute cannot be referred to arbitration against the appellant.
SC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order referring the appellant to arbitration under Section 11(4). Applying the principles in Cox and Kings, SC held that the referral court's role is confined to a prima facie examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement and whether a non-signatory is a veritable party. On the facts, the appellant and respondent operated on "separate orbits" and no intention to bind the appellant to the contract between the other two entities was established, even prima facie. The respondent thus failed the prima facie test, and the dispute cannot be referred to arbitration against the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
