Law in one Paragraph

Babu Singh and Ors. vs. Ram Sahai [AIR 2008 SC 2485]: Supreme Court of India When genuineness of a Will is in question, apart from execution and attestation of Will, person averring validity of the Will to dispel the surrounding suspicious circumstances ‘Attestation’ and ‘execution’ connote two different meanings. Some documents do not require attestation. […]

Chankaya vs. State and Ors. [MANU/DE/2995/2019]: Delhi High Court Will should be signed in presence of attesting witnesses and they shall attest in presence of the testator 21. Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act provides that an unprivileged Will is to be attested by two or more witnesses each of whom has seen the

Kailash vs. Nanku & Ors. [(2005) 4 SCC 480]: Supreme Court of India Time prescribed for filing of written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 is not mandatory 23. Three things are clear. Firstly, a careful reading of the language in which Order VIII, Rule 1 has been drafted, shows that it casts an obligation

State of Goa vs. Praveen Enterprises [AIR 2011 SC 3814]: Supreme Court of India The term “all disputes” gives the Tribunal a very wide jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal 10. Reference to arbitration can be in respect of all disputes between the parties or all disputes regarding a contract or in respect of specific enumerated

State of Goa vs. Praveen Enterprises [AIR 2011 SC 3814]: Supreme Court of India The limitation period for counter-claim is calculated as on the date of filing of counter-claim unless such notice of arbitration for such claim has been given earlier 17. As far as counter claims are concerned, there is no room for ambiguity

M/s S.B.P. & CO. v. Patel Engineering [(2005) 8 SCC 618]: Supreme Court of India Once a question of jurisdiction and validity of arbitration agreement is decided by the Court while appointing an arbitrator same cannot be decided again by the arbitral tribunal 11. Section 16 of the Act only makes explicit what is even

Indus Mobile Distribution Private Limited vs. Datawind Innovations Private Limited and Ors. [AIR 2017 SC 2105]: Supreme Court of India The moment the seat of arbitration is designated, it is akin to an exclusive jurisdiction clause 20. A conspectus of all the aforesaid provisions shows that the moment the seat is designated, it is akin

Inder Singh Rekhi v. Delhi Development Authority [(1988) 2 SCC 338]: Supreme Court of India Dispute or difference is a pre-requisite for reference of a dispute to arbitration. Dispute entails a positive element and assertion in denying, not merely inaction. 4. Therefore, in order to be entitled to order of reference under section 20, it

Shri Satender Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi [2010 (168) DLT 15]: Delhi High Court Limitation period commences when the cause of action accrues and in construction contracts such period of limitation starts to run from the date of submission of final bill 16. A summary of the conclusions on reading of the aforesaid relevant

Kiritkumar Futarmal Jain vs. Valencia Corporation [Special Civil Application No. 15145 of 2019]: Gujarat High Court Once an application of interim measure is decided by the Court under section 9 of the Indian Arbitration Act, it cannot be decided again by the Arbitral Tribunal under section 17(2) of the Act 21.6. In the considered opinion