<?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>Supreme Court Clarifies Chief Engineer&#039;s Decision Isn&#039;t Final; Not an Arbitration Clause Under Review.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=15772</link>
    <description>Appointment of arbitrator - The use of the expression ‘in the first place’ unmistakably shows that non-adjudicatory decision of the Chief Engineer is subject to the right of the aggrieved party to seek remedy - it cannot be treated as an Arbitration Clause - SC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:41:13 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:41:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Clarifies Chief Engineer&#039;s Decision Isn&#039;t Final; Not an Arbitration Clause Under Review.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=15772</link>
      <description>Appointment of arbitrator - The use of the expression ‘in the first place’ unmistakably shows that non-adjudicatory decision of the Chief Engineer is subject to the right of the aggrieved party to seek remedy - it cannot be treated as an Arbitration Clause - SC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:41:13 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=15772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>