https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393902 A joint venture that was the contracting and disputing party was held entitled to maintain the appeal, and firm-like procedural objections were treated as inapplicable. On the pre-arbitral dispute mechanism, the court noted that the contractual Disputes Adjudication Board procedure could not be strictly completed because the stipulated replacement process was unworkable. The respondent received notice, did not propose a replacement, and later appointed an arbitrator under the arbitration clause; that conduct was treated as a waiver of any objection to arbitral jurisdiction. The tribunal's majority view that the reference was non-maintainable was found perverse and patently illegal, and the arbitration was directed to continue on merits. en-us Tue, 03 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393902 A joint venture that was the contracting and disputing party was held entitled to maintain the appeal, and firm-like procedural objections were treated as inapplicable. On the pre-arbitral dispute mechanism, the court noted that the contractual Disputes Adjudication Board procedure could not be strictly completed because the stipulated replacement process was unworkable. The respondent received notice, did not propose a replacement, and later appointed an arbitrator under the arbitration clause; that conduct was treated as a waiver of any objection to arbitral jurisdiction. The tribunal's majority view that the reference was non-maintainable was found perverse and patently illegal, and the arbitration was directed to continue on merits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 03 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393902