https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283957 An objection to execution that challenged the very maintainability of the proceedings and, if accepted, would have terminated them was treated as a judgment for purposes of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The order was regarded as passed de hors the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, so it was not treated as an order under that Act. Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act was held to confer only the appellate forum, not a separate substantive right of appeal. Applying the Clause 10 tests, an order deciding a matter of moment and affecting valuable rights was held appealable, and the appeal was maintained under that provision. en-us Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:44:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283957 An objection to execution that challenged the very maintainability of the proceedings and, if accepted, would have terminated them was treated as a judgment for purposes of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The order was regarded as passed de hors the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, so it was not treated as an order under that Act. Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act was held to confer only the appellate forum, not a separate substantive right of appeal. Applying the Clause 10 tests, an order deciding a matter of moment and affecting valuable rights was held appealable, and the appeal was maintained under that provision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283957