<?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>2025 (12) TMI 704 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783164</link>
    <description>In Section 11 referral proceedings, a court may involve a non-signatory only if it is prima facie satisfied that the person is a veritable party to the arbitration agreement. The court must examine the contract, surrounding dealings, and any material showing real intention to bind the non-signatory; mere commercial association, back-to-back arrangements, emails, or an assignment between other parties is insufficient. On the facts, the respondent&#039;s arrangement was only with the contractor, while the principal contract was with the appellant and no written consent to subletting or assignment was shown. The referral to arbitration was therefore set aside and the Section 11 application dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2025 08:54:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=870701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 704 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783164</link>
      <description>In Section 11 referral proceedings, a court may involve a non-signatory only if it is prima facie satisfied that the person is a veritable party to the arbitration agreement. The court must examine the contract, surrounding dealings, and any material showing real intention to bind the non-signatory; mere commercial association, back-to-back arrangements, emails, or an assignment between other parties is insufficient. On the facts, the respondent&#039;s arrangement was only with the contractor, while the principal contract was with the appellant and no written consent to subletting or assignment was shown. The referral to arbitration was therefore set aside and the Section 11 application dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>