<?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>2008 (7) TMI 1048 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197446</link>
    <description>Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is treated as a mandatory referral provision once the statutory conditions are met, and the court should not refuse reference by deciding at the threshold whether the underlying contract is void, illegal, opposed to public policy, or tainted by fraud. Those validity objections are left to the arbitral tribunal under the Act&#039;s scheme, including the principle of separability and the tribunal&#039;s competence to rule on its own jurisdiction. Impleadment of non-signatories, where no substantive relief is sought against them, does not by itself defeat a request for arbitration; a party cannot avoid its arbitration agreement by joining unnecessary respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2018 16:17:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503415" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 1048 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197446</link>
      <description>Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is treated as a mandatory referral provision once the statutory conditions are met, and the court should not refuse reference by deciding at the threshold whether the underlying contract is void, illegal, opposed to public policy, or tainted by fraud. Those validity objections are left to the arbitral tribunal under the Act&#039;s scheme, including the principle of separability and the tribunal&#039;s competence to rule on its own jurisdiction. Impleadment of non-signatories, where no substantive relief is sought against them, does not by itself defeat a request for arbitration; a party cannot avoid its arbitration agreement by joining unnecessary respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>