<?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>2006 (2) TMI 694 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279602</link>
    <description>A territorial jurisdiction objection under Section 21 CPC is waived when it is raised but not pressed before the trial court and cannot be revived in appeal absent failure of justice. Interim restraint under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must satisfy settled equitable principles, including a prima facie case and risk of irreparable injury. On the stated facts, continuing monthly receipts meant any eventual award could be met from recurring payments, so restraint of payment was not justified. The appeal succeeded because the jurisdiction objection was treated as waived and the requirements for interim prohibitory relief were not made out.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 694 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279602</link>
      <description>A territorial jurisdiction objection under Section 21 CPC is waived when it is raised but not pressed before the trial court and cannot be revived in appeal absent failure of justice. Interim restraint under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must satisfy settled equitable principles, including a prima facie case and risk of irreparable injury. On the stated facts, continuing monthly receipts meant any eventual award could be met from recurring payments, so restraint of payment was not justified. The appeal succeeded because the jurisdiction objection was treated as waived and the requirements for interim prohibitory relief were not made out.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>