SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Litigant Cannot be Worse Off for Filing an Appeal under ‘No Reformatio in Peius’  ||  Orissa HC: Article 22(1) Arrest Rights Pre-Exist, Written Grounds Ruling Not Prospective  ||  Kerala HC: Kissing a Child’s Penis Constitutes Penetrative Sexual Assault under POCSO  ||  Madras HC: Married Daughter Cannot be Denied Compassionate Appointment Solely for Her Marriage  ||  Bombay High Court: Child Welfare Prevails as ‘Joint Parenting’ is Not Recognised in Indian Law  ||  Kerala HC: Minor’s Consent or Relationship with Accused Holds No Relevance under POCSO Act  ||  Bombay HC: Failure to Prove Exact Quantum of Loss Does Not Bar Compensation  ||  CCPA Fines Dial4Trade Rs. 10 Lakh for Online Ammonium Nitrate Listing Featuring Blast Images  ||  Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order    

All. HC: Juris. While Dealing With S.34 App. Can’t be Disputed by Party Filing S.9 App. in One Court - (22 May 2024)

ARBITRATION

All. HC has held that if a party has filed an application under Section 9 of A&C Act, 1996 before one court then objection regarding territorial jurisdiction cannot be raised by the party in dealing with application arising out of same arbitration agreement in view of Section 42 of the Act.

Tags : ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT   TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION   ARBITRATION AGREEMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved