https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295361 A challenge to a partial arbitral award through writ jurisdiction is impermissible where the statutory scheme under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides its own remedies. An application before the District Judge, styled under Section 20 of the Act read with Section 19 of the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, was not maintainable against a partial award made under Section 16, because Section 16(6) does not permit such intervention. The legal position is that orders within the arbitral process are not to be corrected routinely under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution, and parties must pursue remedies available under the Act. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2024 18:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295361 A challenge to a partial arbitral award through writ jurisdiction is impermissible where the statutory scheme under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides its own remedies. An application before the District Judge, styled under Section 20 of the Act read with Section 19 of the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, was not maintainable against a partial award made under Section 16, because Section 16(6) does not permit such intervention. The legal position is that orders within the arbitral process are not to be corrected routinely under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution, and parties must pursue remedies available under the Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295361