<?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>1997 (8) TMI 527 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196974</link>
    <description>Section 8 arbitration relief is unavailable where the applicant has already instituted civil proceedings on the same contractual subject matter, because that conduct amounts to an election of civil remedies and estops a later request for reference to arbitration. The arbitration clause was also time-bound, requiring reference within six months of the dispute arising, and the disputes had arisen long before the application was made, making the request untimely. The clause further preserved recourse to court where the company apprehended alienation or disposal of the hired articles, supporting the suit&#039;s maintainability. A fraud plea was disregarded because it had not been raised in the plaint.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:18:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=500622" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 527 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196974</link>
      <description>Section 8 arbitration relief is unavailable where the applicant has already instituted civil proceedings on the same contractual subject matter, because that conduct amounts to an election of civil remedies and estops a later request for reference to arbitration. The arbitration clause was also time-bound, requiring reference within six months of the dispute arising, and the disputes had arisen long before the application was made, making the request untimely. The clause further preserved recourse to court where the company apprehended alienation or disposal of the hired articles, supporting the suit&#039;s maintainability. A fraud plea was disregarded because it had not been raised in the plaint.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196974</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>