https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194227 Oppression and mismanagement allegations concerning company affairs were held not referable to international arbitration where the company was not a party to the related shareholders' and joint venture agreements, and the escrow agreement was limited to custody of shares and security for obligations. The Board found that the pleaded disputes extended beyond the contractual arbitration clauses and had to be examined by the Board itself. It also held that the company could not be added as a party to the arbitration and that splitting the controversy between arbitration and the Board was impermissible. As the clause excluded the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 except for enforcement of a foreign award, the Section 45 application was not maintainable and was dismissed. en-us Mon, 17 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Sep 2017 15:37:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194227 Oppression and mismanagement allegations concerning company affairs were held not referable to international arbitration where the company was not a party to the related shareholders' and joint venture agreements, and the escrow agreement was limited to custody of shares and security for obligations. The Board found that the pleaded disputes extended beyond the contractual arbitration clauses and had to be examined by the Board itself. It also held that the company could not be added as a party to the arbitration and that splitting the controversy between arbitration and the Board was impermissible. As the clause excluded the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 except for enforcement of a foreign award, the Section 45 application was not maintainable and was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194227