<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (12) TMI 379 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109302</link>
    <description>A trading member of the NSE declared a defaulter is not, on the stated bye-laws, deprived of the contractual right to invoke arbitration for disputes arising before default. Rule 33 governs lapsing and forfeiture of membership rights, but it does not expressly extinguish the arbitration agreement or transfer that right to the Defaulters&#039; Committee. Chapter XI creates a separate arbitration regime, and Bye-law 1C preserves pre-default disputes. The Defaulters&#039; Committee has limited powers and no express authority to substitute the defaulter or itself refer such disputes to arbitration. The challenge to maintainability therefore fails.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 379 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109302</link>
      <description>A trading member of the NSE declared a defaulter is not, on the stated bye-laws, deprived of the contractual right to invoke arbitration for disputes arising before default. Rule 33 governs lapsing and forfeiture of membership rights, but it does not expressly extinguish the arbitration agreement or transfer that right to the Defaulters&#039; Committee. Chapter XI creates a separate arbitration regime, and Bye-law 1C preserves pre-default disputes. The Defaulters&#039; Committee has limited powers and no express authority to substitute the defaulter or itself refer such disputes to arbitration. The challenge to maintainability therefore fails.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109302</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>