https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305163 Courts must exercise extreme circumspection before interfering under Articles 226 and 227 with orders passed in proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because Section 5 limits judicial intervention. Such interference is justified only in exceptional cases involving patent lack of inherent jurisdiction. On the facts described, the High Court's interference with the deposit order did not meet that threshold, so the interference was held unsustainable. The order directing deposit and security was restored. en-us Mon, 05 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Nov 2022 04:45:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305163 Courts must exercise extreme circumspection before interfering under Articles 226 and 227 with orders passed in proceedings under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, because Section 5 limits judicial intervention. Such interference is justified only in exceptional cases involving patent lack of inherent jurisdiction. On the facts described, the High Court's interference with the deposit order did not meet that threshold, so the interference was held unsustainable. The order directing deposit and security was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305163