<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (3) TMI 382 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405054</link>
    <description>At the Section 11 stage, the court&#039;s role is confined to a prima facie scrutiny of the existence and validity of an arbitration agreement, not a conclusive determination. Where the material is disputed or inconclusive, the threshold question of whether a valid arbitration agreement exists should ordinarily be left to the arbitral tribunal. On the facts, the documentary record did not conclusively establish a concluded arbitration agreement, but it was sufficient to justify reference to arbitration. The prior final finding on existence was set aside, while the appointment of the arbitrator was maintained so the tribunal could decide that jurisdictional issue first.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2021 08:30:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=638518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 382 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405054</link>
      <description>At the Section 11 stage, the court&#039;s role is confined to a prima facie scrutiny of the existence and validity of an arbitration agreement, not a conclusive determination. Where the material is disputed or inconclusive, the threshold question of whether a valid arbitration agreement exists should ordinarily be left to the arbitral tribunal. On the facts, the documentary record did not conclusively establish a concluded arbitration agreement, but it was sufficient to justify reference to arbitration. The prior final finding on existence was set aside, while the appointment of the arbitrator was maintained so the tribunal could decide that jurisdictional issue first.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405054</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>