Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 1953 (4) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1953 (4) TMI 20 - SC - Companies LawWhether the appellant had the authority of the umpire to file the awards on his behalf into court in terms of section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act? Whether in view of subsection (3) of section 31 of the Act it can be said that the awards were filed in the Calcutta High Court earlier than in the Gauhati court? Whether the scope of section 31, sub-section (4) of the Act is limited to applications under the Act during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings only? Held that:- Section 31 (4) would vest exclusive jurisdiction in the court in which an application for the, filing of an award has been first made under section 14 of the Act. It is undisputed that the application by the respondent Union of India was made before the Gauhati court on the 10th August, 1949, and the earliest move by the appellant before the Calcutta court was on the 17th August, 1949. All these facts and on the view of the interpretation of section.31, sub-section (4), which we are inclined to take, it is clear that the Gauhati court only has the jurisdiction and not the Calcutta High Court as regards the present dispute. In the result, the two appeals must be dismissed
|