Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 76

8.7. Position under the Code of 1908.-

But the question arose whether the words "otherwise invalid" in the Code of 1908 were or were not to be construed ejusdem generis with the words occurring in the preceding portion of paragraph 15 of the second Schedule to the Code. On this point, there has been a conflict of judicial view.1-3

The undermentioned cases took the wide view,4-6 while a few decisions took the narrower view7 with reference to the Code of 1908.

1. See review of case law in Dooly Chand v. Mamuji, AIR 1917 Cal 481 (reviews cases).

2. Durga Charan v. Ganga Dhar, AIR 1931 Cal 108.

3. Golnur Bibi v. Abdus Samad, AIR 1931 Cal 211.

4. Mahomad v. Valli, AIR 1924 Born 324.

5. Suryanarayana v. Sarabhaiah, 21 Madras Law Journal 263 (278); Paruck Arbitration Act, 1955, p. 241.

6. Mariam v. Amina, ILR (1937) All 371 AIR 1937 All 65 (59, 74) (Majority of the Full Bench).

7. See case law reviewed in Kishan Chand v. Takhit Ram, AIR 1939 Sind 241 (FB) (reviews case law).

Arbitration Act, 1940 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys