<?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>2003 (11) TMI 343 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109478</link>
    <description>An arbitral appointment made without notice to the affected party, followed by an ex parte award, is invalid because arbitral adjudication requires notice and a fair opportunity of hearing. Where the arbitrator is appointed without informing the respondent and the award is made ex parte, the award cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. The stated result is that both the appointment and the award were treated as illegal and void.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Aug 2013 17:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146495" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 343 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109478</link>
      <description>An arbitral appointment made without notice to the affected party, followed by an ex parte award, is invalid because arbitral adjudication requires notice and a fair opportunity of hearing. Where the arbitrator is appointed without informing the respondent and the award is made ex parte, the award cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. The stated result is that both the appointment and the award were treated as illegal and void.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>