A further letter in support of the earlier demand dated 6 3 1995 was also submitted on 29 5 1995 and thereafter an arbitration suit was filed in the High Court of Bombay on 24 8 1995 invoking the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 8 read with Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.
1238 39 of 1997, according to the petitioner, the dispute was sought to be referred to arbitration by lodging a claim in that companynection by the petitioner contractor with the respondent authorities on 6 3 1995 pursuant to the earlier demand dated 20 11 1994.
The petitioners case is that the said claim was rejected on 2 1 1995 and then a demand was made for referring the dispute for arbitration as per clause 63 of the Arbitration Agreement on 6 3 1995.This demand for arbitration came to be rejected by the respondent authorities on 5 7 1995 and that resulted into another arbitration suit which was filed on even date, i.e., 24 8 1995 invoking the very same provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940.
1240 41 of 1997 are companycerned, a demand for arbitration was lodged with the respondents on 24 4 1995.
1242 43 of 1997, according to the petitioner clause 62 of the Arbitration Agreement was invoked on 30 11 1994.
That was with reference to the earlier claim lodged, according to the petitioner under clause 62 of the Arbitration Agreement on 5 1 1995.
In SLPs C Nos.
In SLPs C Nos.
So far as SLPs C Nos.
For resolving this question, a few relevant facts will have to be mentioned at the outset.
