https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196984 Later agreements that materially varied the original contractual matrix, introduced a new party, and shifted disputes to the exclusive jurisdiction of Calcutta courts were treated as superseding the earlier arbitration clause, so foreign arbitration could not be invoked on that clause. Earlier company proceedings did not bar the dispute by res judicata or constructive res judicata because they were not decided on the contractual merits and had failed for want of jurisdiction. Time spent in bona fide proceedings before forums lacking jurisdiction was excluded under section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, so the arbitral reference was treated as within limitation. No cause of action was disclosed against the third and fourth defendants, and their deletion from the suit was allowed. en-us Thu, 20 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:55:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196984 Later agreements that materially varied the original contractual matrix, introduced a new party, and shifted disputes to the exclusive jurisdiction of Calcutta courts were treated as superseding the earlier arbitration clause, so foreign arbitration could not be invoked on that clause. Earlier company proceedings did not bar the dispute by res judicata or constructive res judicata because they were not decided on the contractual merits and had failed for want of jurisdiction. Time spent in bona fide proceedings before forums lacking jurisdiction was excluded under section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, so the arbitral reference was treated as within limitation. No cause of action was disclosed against the third and fourth defendants, and their deletion from the suit was allowed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 20 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196984