[Civil Appeal No. 7134 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No.8950 of 2010]. [Civil Appeal Nos. 7135-7136 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No.26514-26515 of 2011]. The expanding need for international arbitration and divergent schools of thought, have provided new dimensions to the arbitration jurisprudence in the international field. The present case is an ideal example of invocation of arbitral reference in multiple, multi- party agreements with intrinsically interlinked causes of action, more so, where performance of ancillary agreements is substantially dependent upon effective execution of the principal agreement. The distinguished learned counsel appearing for the parties have raised critical questions of law relatable to the facts of the present case which in the opinion of the Court are as follows: What is the ambit and scope of Section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the 1996 Act')? Whether the principles enunciated in the case of Sukanya Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. Jayesh H. Pandya [(2003) 5 SCC 531], is the correct exposition of law?
↧