<?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>2019 (3) TMI 1946 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300060</link>
    <description>Arbitral proceedings commenced before 23 October 2015 remain governed by the pre-amendment Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 because Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment excludes the amended regime once proceedings have started under Section 21, unless the parties agree otherwise. A no claim certificate and final payment do not automatically bar arbitration; the decisive question is whether the discharge was truly voluntary or was obtained under coercion, compulsion, or economic duress. Under Section 11(6), the court must ordinarily follow the contractual appointment mechanism and may depart from it only if that procedure has failed or become legally inoperative. The agreed appointment process therefore had to be respected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 08:34:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1946 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300060</link>
      <description>Arbitral proceedings commenced before 23 October 2015 remain governed by the pre-amendment Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 because Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment excludes the amended regime once proceedings have started under Section 21, unless the parties agree otherwise. A no claim certificate and final payment do not automatically bar arbitration; the decisive question is whether the discharge was truly voluntary or was obtained under coercion, compulsion, or economic duress. Under Section 11(6), the court must ordinarily follow the contractual appointment mechanism and may depart from it only if that procedure has failed or become legally inoperative. The agreed appointment process therefore had to be respected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>