https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290502 On the joint request of both parties, the Court referred the disputes arising from the memorandum of agreement to arbitration and issued consequential directions for the conduct of the reference. The plaint was to be treated as the claim and the respondents' claim petition as the counterclaim; Chennai was fixed as the seat of arbitration, while the arbitrator was allowed to choose a convenient venue and seek expert assistance if necessary. The order also recorded the parties' entitlement to seek refund of court fee under section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, and stated that the judicial direction would supersede the contractual arbitration clause. en-us Mon, 20 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Oct 2020 11:03:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290502 On the joint request of both parties, the Court referred the disputes arising from the memorandum of agreement to arbitration and issued consequential directions for the conduct of the reference. The plaint was to be treated as the claim and the respondents' claim petition as the counterclaim; Chennai was fixed as the seat of arbitration, while the arbitrator was allowed to choose a convenient venue and seek expert assistance if necessary. The order also recorded the parties' entitlement to seek refund of court fee under section 16 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, and stated that the judicial direction would supersede the contractual arbitration clause. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 20 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290502