https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108975 A private contractual arbitrator in a hire-purchase dispute is not ordinarily amenable to supervisory review under Article 227, and interference is confined to jurisdictional error, perversity, patent illegality, or manifest injustice; the refusal to stay the arbitral proceedings therefore was not interfered with. Section 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not bar constitutional review, but it reinforces the limited scope of court intervention in arbitral matters. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 did not apply because the arbitration did not fall within the statutory categories of stayed proceedings. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:18:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108975 A private contractual arbitrator in a hire-purchase dispute is not ordinarily amenable to supervisory review under Article 227, and interference is confined to jurisdictional error, perversity, patent illegality, or manifest injustice; the refusal to stay the arbitral proceedings therefore was not interfered with. Section 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not bar constitutional review, but it reinforces the limited scope of court intervention in arbitral matters. Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 did not apply because the arbitration did not fall within the statutory categories of stayed proceedings. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 30 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108975