2002 (3) TMI 873

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is filed for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to appoint an umpire under bye-law No. 248(1) of the Bye-laws, rules and regulations of the Madras Stock Exchange on the failure of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to pass an award within the statutory time and pass an award at the earliest dispute that had arisen between the petitioner firm and the second respondent. 2. The p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....246(1) appointed the 4th respondent as arbitrator. The second respondent on 8-7-1989 filed a counter statement disputing the claim of the petitioner. The arbitrators according to regulation No. 250 have to file the award within four months or within the extended period. On 6-9-1991 since the matter was pending for considerable time, the arbitrators decided to appoint an auditor to scrutinise the s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled by any of the respondents. From the affidavit, it is seen that the respondents 3 and 4, who have been appointed as arbitrators have not passed award till date, even though the arbitrators were appointed as early as 5-5-1989. According to bye-law 248 of Madras Stock Exchange bye-laws, the council of management or the President shall appoint an umpire if from any cause the arbitrators appointed....