https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293917 The HC allowed the Chamber Appeal, deleting Defendant No.1 from the suit, as it was not a necessary party, given the Master Dealer Agreement was solely between Plaintiff No.2 and Defendant No.2. Additionally, the court referred the matter to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, as the agreements were interconnected, and the arbitration clause applied. The suit was disposed of accordingly. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293917 The HC allowed the Chamber Appeal, deleting Defendant No.1 from the suit, as it was not a necessary party, given the Master Dealer Agreement was solely between Plaintiff No.2 and Defendant No.2. Additionally, the court referred the matter to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, as the agreements were interconnected, and the arbitration clause applied. The suit was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293917