<?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>1993 (1) TMI 253 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127623</link>
    <description>Contractual appointment of an arbitrator should ordinarily be enforced where the arbitration clause provides a specific nomination mechanism, and a court should not substitute an independent arbitrator merely because the appointing authority is a party to the contract. Allegations of bias justify departure from the agreed procedure only on specific facts showing a real or reasonably founded apprehension of bias, not on mere suspicion or the fact that the arbitrator is chosen from the defendant&#039;s engineers. The text states that, on the facts proved, the contractual mechanism was upheld and nomination was to proceed under the stipulated clause.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:46:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (1) TMI 253 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127623</link>
      <description>Contractual appointment of an arbitrator should ordinarily be enforced where the arbitration clause provides a specific nomination mechanism, and a court should not substitute an independent arbitrator merely because the appointing authority is a party to the contract. Allegations of bias justify departure from the agreed procedure only on specific facts showing a real or reasonably founded apprehension of bias, not on mere suspicion or the fact that the arbitrator is chosen from the defendant&#039;s engineers. The text states that, on the facts proved, the contractual mechanism was upheld and nomination was to proceed under the stipulated clause.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>