<?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>2004 (3) TMI 829 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309259</link>
    <description>A decree founded on an arbitral award was treated as a nullity where the contractor had already accepted final settlement, submitted a no claim certificate, and received refund of the security deposit before raising the disputes. On that admitted position, the contractual bar had already operated, so the disputes were not arbitrable under the arbitration clause. Because an award on an invalid reference is void ab initio, the resulting decree was also void and could not be executed. The objection to executability was therefore maintainable under Section 47, and principles of waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel could not validate the void decree.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2023 13:15:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=723205" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 829 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309259</link>
      <description>A decree founded on an arbitral award was treated as a nullity where the contractor had already accepted final settlement, submitted a no claim certificate, and received refund of the security deposit before raising the disputes. On that admitted position, the contractual bar had already operated, so the disputes were not arbitrable under the arbitration clause. Because an award on an invalid reference is void ab initio, the resulting decree was also void and could not be executed. The objection to executability was therefore maintainable under Section 47, and principles of waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel could not validate the void decree.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>