<?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>2016 (7) TMI 1354 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194449</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the impugned arbitral awards, finding them to be based on no evidence, perverse, and in violation of mandatory NSE regulations. The court emphasized the importance of complying with statutory regulations over discretionary clauses in agreements, aligning its judgments in all five petitions with the reasoning in Arbitration Petition No. 47 of 2009.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2017 11:00:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1354 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194449</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the impugned arbitral awards, finding them to be based on no evidence, perverse, and in violation of mandatory NSE regulations. The court emphasized the importance of complying with statutory regulations over discretionary clauses in agreements, aligning its judgments in all five petitions with the reasoning in Arbitration Petition No. 47 of 2009.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194449</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>