https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459633 Arbitral jurisdiction was upheld where trading dealings, initial margin, KYC documents, and subsequent transfers showed that the trading member and Sai Soft Securities were in substance the same concern. The court noted common control, identical address and e-mail details, and surrounding circumstances indicating the real relationship between the parties, and it therefore lifted the corporate veil to examine alleged fraud and misuse. The petitioner's participation in the arbitral process through a counterclaim also supported application of the exchange bye-laws and the arbitral forum. Interference under Section 34 was refused because the challenge concerned factual findings and contractual interpretation, which do not justify reappreciation in annulment proceedings. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:51:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459633 Arbitral jurisdiction was upheld where trading dealings, initial margin, KYC documents, and subsequent transfers showed that the trading member and Sai Soft Securities were in substance the same concern. The court noted common control, identical address and e-mail details, and surrounding circumstances indicating the real relationship between the parties, and it therefore lifted the corporate veil to examine alleged fraud and misuse. The petitioner's participation in the arbitral process through a counterclaim also supported application of the exchange bye-laws and the arbitral forum. Interference under Section 34 was refused because the challenge concerned factual findings and contractual interpretation, which do not justify reappreciation in annulment proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459633