<?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>1976 (9) TMI 179 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180506</link>
    <description>A contractual arbitration clause was construed commercially to preserve the parties&#039; bargain rather than defeat it on technical uncertainty. Although the Ministry of Food and Agriculture had later been bifurcated, the reference to the Secretary in that Ministry was read in context as the Secretary responsible for the contract&#039;s subject matter, namely the Department of Food. On that construction, the arbitrator nominated by that Secretary was validly appointed, and the challenge based on invalid appointment failed. The other side&#039;s participation in the arbitration without objection supported that reading, though waiver was not essential to the result.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2016 12:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (9) TMI 179 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180506</link>
      <description>A contractual arbitration clause was construed commercially to preserve the parties&#039; bargain rather than defeat it on technical uncertainty. Although the Ministry of Food and Agriculture had later been bifurcated, the reference to the Secretary in that Ministry was read in context as the Secretary responsible for the contract&#039;s subject matter, namely the Department of Food. On that construction, the arbitrator nominated by that Secretary was validly appointed, and the challenge based on invalid appointment failed. The other side&#039;s participation in the arbitration without objection supported that reading, though waiver was not essential to the result.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180506</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>