https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311634 The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was applied to clarify that the forum for a Section 34 challenge is determined by the definition of "Court" in Section 2(1)(e), not by the fact that the arbitrator was appointed by the Supreme Court. Such appointment does not make the Supreme Court the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction, and requiring challenges to be filed there would disrupt the Act's appellate scheme, including the appeal under Section 37(1)(b). The earlier view was reaffirmed that the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction remains the proper forum even where the appointment is made by the Supreme Court or the High Court. en-us Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jan 2024 15:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311634 The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was applied to clarify that the forum for a Section 34 challenge is determined by the definition of "Court" in Section 2(1)(e), not by the fact that the arbitrator was appointed by the Supreme Court. Such appointment does not make the Supreme Court the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction, and requiring challenges to be filed there would disrupt the Act's appellate scheme, including the appeal under Section 37(1)(b). The earlier view was reaffirmed that the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction remains the proper forum even where the appointment is made by the Supreme Court or the High Court. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311634