https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257086 A challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must be filed before the court having territorial jurisdiction over the arbitration proceedings and otherwise competent under Section 20 CPC. Where the arbitration was conducted at Raichur and the contract documents recorded Raichur jurisdiction, the District Court at Latur could not entertain the application. The objection to territorial jurisdiction not having been raised during arbitration did not confer jurisdiction on an incompetent forum. Section 42 was applied to confirm that the first court approached must also be a competent court, and a court outside the agreed or statutorily competent jurisdiction cannot hear the challenge. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 07:19:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257086 A challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must be filed before the court having territorial jurisdiction over the arbitration proceedings and otherwise competent under Section 20 CPC. Where the arbitration was conducted at Raichur and the contract documents recorded Raichur jurisdiction, the District Court at Latur could not entertain the application. The objection to territorial jurisdiction not having been raised during arbitration did not confer jurisdiction on an incompetent forum. Section 42 was applied to confirm that the first court approached must also be a competent court, and a court outside the agreed or statutorily competent jurisdiction cannot hear the challenge. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257086