https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196990 In a New York Convention arbitration, the Court distinguished Part II from Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and held that Section 45 requires the Court to satisfy itself that the arbitration agreement is not null, void, inoperative or incapable of being performed before directing reference. On the facts, the parties' prior litigation conduct and inconsistent positions showed that the arbitration clause had become inoperative, making referral to arbitration futile. Civil proceedings were therefore allowed to continue and interim protection in favour of the plaintiff was maintained. en-us Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:43:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196990 In a New York Convention arbitration, the Court distinguished Part II from Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and held that Section 45 requires the Court to satisfy itself that the arbitration agreement is not null, void, inoperative or incapable of being performed before directing reference. On the facts, the parties' prior litigation conduct and inconsistent positions showed that the arbitration clause had become inoperative, making referral to arbitration futile. Civil proceedings were therefore allowed to continue and interim protection in favour of the plaintiff was maintained. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196990