<?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>2012 (7) TMI 1050 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197259</link>
    <description>Interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was not available to revive a terminated lease arrangement for operation of a luxury train or to create a fresh operating right. The Court treated the petitioner&#039;s request as seeking a mandatory injunction that would, in substance, restore contractual rights after termination, which is impermissible at the interim stage. Any remedy for alleged breach lay in damages, while the owner&#039;s continued operation of the train pending arbitration could be accepted on the facts. The High Court order was left undisturbed and the dispute was to be resolved in arbitration without prejudice to the parties&#039; rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2018 14:38:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 1050 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197259</link>
      <description>Interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was not available to revive a terminated lease arrangement for operation of a luxury train or to create a fresh operating right. The Court treated the petitioner&#039;s request as seeking a mandatory injunction that would, in substance, restore contractual rights after termination, which is impermissible at the interim stage. Any remedy for alleged breach lay in damages, while the owner&#039;s continued operation of the train pending arbitration could be accepted on the facts. The High Court order was left undisturbed and the dispute was to be resolved in arbitration without prejudice to the parties&#039; rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>