https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296654 Contractual arbitration agreements should ordinarily be given effect, but courts retain residual discretion under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act to grant or refuse a stay of suit on the totality of circumstances. The High Court's refusal to stay was upheld because no gross error of discretion was shown. Mere silence in reply to a Section 80 C.P.C. notice does not, by itself, bar a defendant from moving under Section 34 and invoking arbitration, though delay remains a relevant discretionary factor. The Court also criticised governmental indifference to statutory notices and court process, stressing greater litigative diligence and accountability. en-us Fri, 14 Oct 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jul 2021 12:50:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296654 Contractual arbitration agreements should ordinarily be given effect, but courts retain residual discretion under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act to grant or refuse a stay of suit on the totality of circumstances. The High Court's refusal to stay was upheld because no gross error of discretion was shown. Mere silence in reply to a Section 80 C.P.C. notice does not, by itself, bar a defendant from moving under Section 34 and invoking arbitration, though delay remains a relevant discretionary factor. The Court also criticised governmental indifference to statutory notices and court process, stressing greater litigative diligence and accountability. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Oct 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296654