<?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 1361 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301851</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s request for the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as the claim was found to be time-barred due to the petition being filed in 2019, well beyond the limitation period set forth in the Act. The Court&#039;s decision resulted in the dismissal of the petition filed as AP 748 of 2019.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2022 21:50:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 1361 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301851</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s request for the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as the claim was found to be time-barred due to the petition being filed in 2019, well beyond the limitation period set forth in the Act. The Court&#039;s decision resulted in the dismissal of the petition filed as AP 748 of 2019.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301851</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>