https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295536 Section 34 of the Arbitration Act permits a stay only when the entire proceeding concerns a matter covered by the arbitration agreement. Where the plaint includes substantial claims against parties or on matters outside the arbitration clause, the court should refuse a stay because the dispute is not wholly referable to arbitration. The court should also avoid an order that would split the suit into separate proceedings without corresponding advantage. On these facts, the claim against some defendants fell outside the clause and the proposed stay would have fragmented the litigation, so stay was refused and the appeal failed. en-us Thu, 14 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2021 15:08:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295536 Section 34 of the Arbitration Act permits a stay only when the entire proceeding concerns a matter covered by the arbitration agreement. Where the plaint includes substantial claims against parties or on matters outside the arbitration clause, the court should refuse a stay because the dispute is not wholly referable to arbitration. The court should also avoid an order that would split the suit into separate proceedings without corresponding advantage. On these facts, the claim against some defendants fell outside the clause and the proposed stay would have fragmented the litigation, so stay was refused and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 14 Jan 1954 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295536