<?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 (4) TMI 302 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160853</link>
    <description>In an exceptional case, a court may revoke an arbitrator&#039;s authority and treat the arbitration agreement as ineffective where the underlying claim is hopelessly time-barred and the claimant has remained inactive for a long period. The analysis applies the Arbitration Act, 1940: revocation of authority may be granted with leave of court, and once authority is revoked the arbitration agreement can cease to operate for the dispute. Limitation applies to arbitration, and prolonged inaction may show that the claimant slept over its rights. On the stated facts, no effective step was taken for more than ten years, so the dispute was already barred when arbitration was invoked and relief from the arbitration agreement was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2014 08:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (4) TMI 302 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160853</link>
      <description>In an exceptional case, a court may revoke an arbitrator&#039;s authority and treat the arbitration agreement as ineffective where the underlying claim is hopelessly time-barred and the claimant has remained inactive for a long period. The analysis applies the Arbitration Act, 1940: revocation of authority may be granted with leave of court, and once authority is revoked the arbitration agreement can cease to operate for the dispute. Limitation applies to arbitration, and prolonged inaction may show that the claimant slept over its rights. On the stated facts, no effective step was taken for more than ten years, so the dispute was already barred when arbitration was invoked and relief from the arbitration agreement was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160853</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>