https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274225 The true nature of jurisdiction invoked, rather than the petition's label, determines whether an intra-court appeal is maintainable: writ relief challenging action contrary to statute was treated as arising under Article 226 rather than supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227. A principal civil court considering an arbitral award challenge performs a curial function akin to a tribunal with the trappings of a court, rather than exercising ordinary civil jurisdiction. Prior notice, supported by affidavit, is a mandatory precondition to filing an award challenge; later notice cannot cure non-compliance. The intra-court appeal was therefore maintainable, while the award challenge could not proceed without prior-notice compliance. en-us Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Aug 2018 07:56:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274225 The true nature of jurisdiction invoked, rather than the petition's label, determines whether an intra-court appeal is maintainable: writ relief challenging action contrary to statute was treated as arising under Article 226 rather than supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227. A principal civil court considering an arbitral award challenge performs a curial function akin to a tribunal with the trappings of a court, rather than exercising ordinary civil jurisdiction. Prior notice, supported by affidavit, is a mandatory precondition to filing an award challenge; later notice cannot cure non-compliance. The intra-court appeal was therefore maintainable, while the award challenge could not proceed without prior-notice compliance. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274225