<?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 (5) TMI 844 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752791</link>
    <description>Section 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits termination of arbitral proceedings only where the tribunal records, on the material before it, that continuation has become unnecessary or impossible. Mere inactivity by a claimant, including failure to seek a hearing date, is not enough to establish abandonment; implied abandonment can be inferred only from clear circumstances leaving no reasonable alternative conclusion. The tribunal must also conduct the proceedings and fix hearings, and a party&#039;s default at a hearing is ordinarily addressed under Section 25. On the facts, the record did not show express or implied abandonment, so termination was invalid and the order setting it aside was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 10:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=753502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 844 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752791</link>
      <description>Section 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits termination of arbitral proceedings only where the tribunal records, on the material before it, that continuation has become unnecessary or impossible. Mere inactivity by a claimant, including failure to seek a hearing date, is not enough to establish abandonment; implied abandonment can be inferred only from clear circumstances leaving no reasonable alternative conclusion. The tribunal must also conduct the proceedings and fix hearings, and a party&#039;s default at a hearing is ordinarily addressed under Section 25. On the facts, the record did not show express or implied abandonment, so termination was invalid and the order setting it aside was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>