https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757861 An arbitral award could not be set aside merely because the dispute may have been governed by the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 rather than the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, where the jurisdictional objection was not raised at the relevant stage and the challenge had proceeded mainly on merits. The earlier authority on the 1983 Act was distinguished on that basis. Since the Section 37 appeal had been decided only on the jurisdictional ground and its merits were not examined, the matter was restored for fresh hearing, with consequential protection of sums withdrawn under the award and resort to Article 142 to secure complete justice. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2024 15:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757861 An arbitral award could not be set aside merely because the dispute may have been governed by the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 rather than the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, where the jurisdictional objection was not raised at the relevant stage and the challenge had proceeded mainly on merits. The earlier authority on the 1983 Act was distinguished on that basis. Since the Section 37 appeal had been decided only on the jurisdictional ground and its merits were not examined, the matter was restored for fresh hearing, with consequential protection of sums withdrawn under the award and resort to Article 142 to secure complete justice. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757861