https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279517 The court interpreted the notice requirement under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, emphasizing that notice need not be in writing but can be oral as long as the communication of the filing of the award is made to the parties. The court held that the communication of the filing of the award to the counsel for the parties constituted valid notice. It clarified that notice should be issued after the award is filed, even if other documents are not filed simultaneously, and dismissed arguments requiring notice after all documents are filed. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment, affirmed the award, and directed parties to bear their own costs. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Mar 2019 14:24:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279517 The court interpreted the notice requirement under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, emphasizing that notice need not be in writing but can be oral as long as the communication of the filing of the award is made to the parties. The court held that the communication of the filing of the award to the counsel for the parties constituted valid notice. It clarified that notice should be issued after the award is filed, even if other documents are not filed simultaneously, and dismissed arguments requiring notice after all documents are filed. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment, affirmed the award, and directed parties to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279517