<?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>1995 (11) TMI 435 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165189</link>
    <description>An arbitration clause was treated as a collateral term that survives termination where the contract has not been rescinded, substituted, or otherwise extinguished, and where the dispute concerns interpretation, breach, or matters arising under the agreement. Territorial jurisdiction under section 33 could not rest merely on the petitioner&#039;s business at Coimbatore or on a reply sent from there; jurisdiction depends on the defendant&#039;s residence or business, or on part of the cause of action arising within the territory. A claim based on defective work and short filling was also held not to be manifestly time-barred, because the cause of action accrued in 1985 and the reference made in 1988 was still within time on the stated facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (11) TMI 435 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165189</link>
      <description>An arbitration clause was treated as a collateral term that survives termination where the contract has not been rescinded, substituted, or otherwise extinguished, and where the dispute concerns interpretation, breach, or matters arising under the agreement. Territorial jurisdiction under section 33 could not rest merely on the petitioner&#039;s business at Coimbatore or on a reply sent from there; jurisdiction depends on the defendant&#039;s residence or business, or on part of the cause of action arising within the territory. A claim based on defective work and short filling was also held not to be manifestly time-barred, because the cause of action accrued in 1985 and the reference made in 1988 was still within time on the stated facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>