<?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 (10) TMI 1457 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461132</link>
    <description>Arbitral procedure under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 requires equal treatment of parties, a full opportunity to present their case, and advance notice of hearings. On a section 17 application, an ex parte ad-interim order cannot ordinarily be granted merely on the papers where both parties are before the tribunal, because those procedural safeguards apply throughout the process. The commentary notes that the Indian statute does not adopt the UNCITRAL Model Law mechanism for preliminary ex parte orders, and only exceptional urgency supported by the statutory framework could justify dispensing with notice. The practical effect is that interim relief should generally be considered after notice and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:18:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=806582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 1457 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461132</link>
      <description>Arbitral procedure under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 requires equal treatment of parties, a full opportunity to present their case, and advance notice of hearings. On a section 17 application, an ex parte ad-interim order cannot ordinarily be granted merely on the papers where both parties are before the tribunal, because those procedural safeguards apply throughout the process. The commentary notes that the Indian statute does not adopt the UNCITRAL Model Law mechanism for preliminary ex parte orders, and only exceptional urgency supported by the statutory framework could justify dispensing with notice. The practical effect is that interim relief should generally be considered after notice and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461132</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>