https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270074 The court dismissed the application under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and rejected the prayer for referring the dispute to arbitration. It held that disputes raised under sections 397, 398, 402, and 403 of the Companies Act, involving allegations of oppression and mismanagement, are not arbitrable. The statutory jurisdiction of the Company Law Board prevails over an arbitration clause in the Joint Venture Agreement, as the reliefs sought in the petition touch upon larger public interest and the status of the company, making them non-arbitrable. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Dec 2015 01:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270074 The court dismissed the application under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and rejected the prayer for referring the dispute to arbitration. It held that disputes raised under sections 397, 398, 402, and 403 of the Companies Act, involving allegations of oppression and mismanagement, are not arbitrable. The statutory jurisdiction of the Company Law Board prevails over an arbitration clause in the Joint Venture Agreement, as the reliefs sought in the petition touch upon larger public interest and the status of the company, making them non-arbitrable. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270074