https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279233 A permissive arbitration clause in the shareholders' agreement and articles did not make arbitration the exclusive remedy for an oppression and mismanagement dispute, especially where the documents preserved other contractual and court remedies. On that construction, the dispute was not shown to fall within a binding arbitration agreement requiring reference under section 8. The section 8 request also failed because the respondents had already filed a substantive reply and further applications, which amounted to a statement on the substance of the dispute and made the application time-barred. The request to refer the matter to arbitration was therefore rejected. en-us Fri, 08 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Mar 2019 14:15:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279233 A permissive arbitration clause in the shareholders' agreement and articles did not make arbitration the exclusive remedy for an oppression and mismanagement dispute, especially where the documents preserved other contractual and court remedies. On that construction, the dispute was not shown to fall within a binding arbitration agreement requiring reference under section 8. The section 8 request also failed because the respondents had already filed a substantive reply and further applications, which amounted to a statement on the substance of the dispute and made the application time-barred. The request to refer the matter to arbitration was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 08 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279233