<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (9) TMI 1120 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168092</link>
    <description>Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 confers exclusive jurisdiction on the court where the first application under Part I is made, so later applications arising from the same arbitration agreement and proceedings must be filed there. The definition of &quot;court&quot; in Section 2(e) includes the principal civil court of original jurisdiction and, where applicable, the High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction. The 1996 Act scheme differs materially from the Arbitration Act, 1940, making contrary earlier authorities inapplicable. On the stated facts, because the first application had already been filed in this court, the Section 34 challenge was treated as a subsequent application within Section 42.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2015 12:55:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 1120 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168092</link>
      <description>Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 confers exclusive jurisdiction on the court where the first application under Part I is made, so later applications arising from the same arbitration agreement and proceedings must be filed there. The definition of &quot;court&quot; in Section 2(e) includes the principal civil court of original jurisdiction and, where applicable, the High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction. The 1996 Act scheme differs materially from the Arbitration Act, 1940, making contrary earlier authorities inapplicable. On the stated facts, because the first application had already been filed in this court, the Section 34 challenge was treated as a subsequent application within Section 42.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>