<?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>2013 (12) TMI 32 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240367</link>
    <description>A composite suit seeking specific performance of an agreement to create a mortgage and enforcement of the mortgage is not referable to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because enforcement of the mortgage affects rights in rem and is for judicial determination. Although specific performance of a contract to execute a mortgage is recognised under the Specific Relief Act, the suit&#039;s broader reliefs take it outside arbitration. The dispute also could not be bifurcated for partial reference, as the arbitration clause covered only the loan and services agreements, while the personal guarantee agreement contained no arbitration clause and the guarantor was not shown to be bound by any arbitration agreement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Dec 2013 20:26:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 32 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240367</link>
      <description>A composite suit seeking specific performance of an agreement to create a mortgage and enforcement of the mortgage is not referable to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because enforcement of the mortgage affects rights in rem and is for judicial determination. Although specific performance of a contract to execute a mortgage is recognised under the Specific Relief Act, the suit&#039;s broader reliefs take it outside arbitration. The dispute also could not be bifurcated for partial reference, as the arbitration clause covered only the loan and services agreements, while the personal guarantee agreement contained no arbitration clause and the guarantor was not shown to be bound by any arbitration agreement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240367</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>