Arbitration Clause In Lease Agreement Sample India

…, 1996, and by directing the parties to settle the dispute by arbitration, by appointing a mutually agreed arbitrator in accordance with clause 9 of the above-mentioned deed of tenancy, to settle the dispute relating thereto. September 2012 with the agreement of the parties. The extract from that decision is as follows: “This application was filed by the defendant, in which it was found, inter alia, that the deed of lease of 15.01.2010, which was p. Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, by the defendant, by order of 13.09.2012, the Hon`ble High Court was pleased to accept the application and to arbitrate the parties in respect of the. In this case, the Allahabad Supreme Court also found that, from the interpretation of Section 11(6-A) of the Act, the intention of the legislator is clear, i.e. the Tribunal should and should consider only one aspect, that is, the existence of an arbitration agreement. What are the factors in deciding whether there is an arbitration agreement is the next question. The solution is simple, it must be seen whether the agreement contains a clause providing for an arbitration procedure with regard to disputes that have emerged between the parties to the agreement. “114A. In some other cases, a contract for the rental of a building by forfeiture for breach of an express condition that provides that the lessor may re-approve in the event of a breach of that condition, that there is no remedy for eviction, unless the lessor has served written notice on the tenant – in addition, the question of the capacity to arbitrate with regard to section 8 of the Act (which is also due to the verification of the existence of an in force arbitration agreement for the referral of the parties for conciliation by the court) in my view, of the High Court in U.P. Industrial Co-operative Association Ltd. vs Rajendra Kumar Dhingra, MANU/UP/0564/2019, very well answered. In this case, the Allahabad Supreme Court relied on Himangni and rejected the revisionist`s assertion in this case, who insisted that the issue of the dispute`s ability to arbitrate should have been submitted for decision by the arbitrator in accordance with section 16 of the law.

. . .

Leave a reply