https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275912 After service of summons, a defendant's oral request for adjournment to file a written statement was treated as a step in the proceedings for the purposes of section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act. The court rejected the distinction between an oral and written request, holding that an adjournment sought to enable filing of the written statement has the same legal effect either way. A precedent relied on by the party seeking stay was held inapplicable because it concerned different facts. As a result, the stay application was not maintainable and the appeal failed. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:55:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275912 After service of summons, a defendant's oral request for adjournment to file a written statement was treated as a step in the proceedings for the purposes of section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act. The court rejected the distinction between an oral and written request, holding that an adjournment sought to enable filing of the written statement has the same legal effect either way. A precedent relied on by the party seeking stay was held inapplicable because it concerned different facts. As a result, the stay application was not maintainable and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275912