https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465876 Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction is generally unavailable to challenge an interlocutory arbitral order rejecting additional documents, because the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 confines appeals to the specific situations in Section 37. The impugned order was not an interim award, so Section 34 was not yet available. Judicial interference in ongoing arbitration is reserved for rare exceptional cases, such as bad faith or complete absence of an effective remedy, and those limits were not met here. en-us Mon, 25 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jan 2026 08:56:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465876 Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction is generally unavailable to challenge an interlocutory arbitral order rejecting additional documents, because the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 confines appeals to the specific situations in Section 37. The impugned order was not an interim award, so Section 34 was not yet available. Judicial interference in ongoing arbitration is reserved for rare exceptional cases, such as bad faith or complete absence of an effective remedy, and those limits were not met here. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 25 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465876