<?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>2024 (3) TMI 121 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340</link>
    <description>Section 11(6) applications for appointment of an arbitrator are subject to the Limitation Act, with Article 137 applying where no specific period is prescribed; time runs from accrual of the right to apply after a valid notice invoking arbitration and failure to act under the appointment procedure. On the stated facts, the petition was filed within time and was not barred by limitation. At the referral stage, a court may decline reference only on a prima facie review where the underlying claim is manifestly dead, ex facie time-barred, or there is no subsisting dispute; because the claims were not hopelessly time-barred on commencement of arbitration, reference could not be refused and the dispute was referable to arbitration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2025 12:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 121 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340</link>
      <description>Section 11(6) applications for appointment of an arbitrator are subject to the Limitation Act, with Article 137 applying where no specific period is prescribed; time runs from accrual of the right to apply after a valid notice invoking arbitration and failure to act under the appointment procedure. On the stated facts, the petition was filed within time and was not barred by limitation. At the referral stage, a court may decline reference only on a prima facie review where the underlying claim is manifestly dead, ex facie time-barred, or there is no subsisting dispute; because the claims were not hopelessly time-barred on commencement of arbitration, reference could not be refused and the dispute was referable to arbitration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450340</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>