https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109589 Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 empowers an arbitral tribunal to rule on objections to its own jurisdiction and on the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. Where the tribunal rejects such an objection, the statutory scheme requires the arbitration to proceed and leaves the aggrieved party to pursue the prescribed post-award challenge. The Gauhati HC held that a writ petition against such an interlocutory jurisdictional order is ordinarily not maintainable, because intermediate judicial interference would undermine the Act's expeditious dispute-resolution framework. The tribunal was therefore competent to decide its jurisdiction, and writ interference was declined. en-us Wed, 21 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:29:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109589 Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 empowers an arbitral tribunal to rule on objections to its own jurisdiction and on the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. Where the tribunal rejects such an objection, the statutory scheme requires the arbitration to proceed and leaves the aggrieved party to pursue the prescribed post-award challenge. The Gauhati HC held that a writ petition against such an interlocutory jurisdictional order is ordinarily not maintainable, because intermediate judicial interference would undermine the Act's expeditious dispute-resolution framework. The tribunal was therefore competent to decide its jurisdiction, and writ interference was declined. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 21 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109589