Whether HC Which Has Jurisdiction Over 'Venue' Of Arbitration Can Entertain Petition Seeking Appointment Of Arbitrator?

Where the contract specifies the jurisdiction of the court at

a particular place, only such court will have the jurisdiction to

deal with the matter and parties intended to exclude all other

courts. In the present case, the parties have agreed that the

“venue” of arbitration shall be at Bhubaneswar. Considering

the agreement of the parties having Bhubaneswar as the venue

of arbitration, the intention of the parties is to exclude all other

courts. As held in Swastik, non-use of words like “exclusive

jurisdiction”, “only”, “exclusive”, “alone” is not decisive and does

not make any material difference.

17. When the parties have agreed to have the “venue” of

arbitration at Bhubaneswar, the Madras High Court erred in

assuming the jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the Act. Since

only Orissa High Court will have the jurisdiction to entertain the

petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Act, the impugned order

is liable to be set aside.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5850 2019

BRAHMANI RIVER PELLETS LIMITED Vs KAMACHI INDUSTRIES LIMITED

R. BANUMATHI, J.

Dated:July 25, 2019.

Citation: 2019 SCC OnLine SC 929

Print Page

Whether arbitration proceeding can be conducted at place where no cause of action accrued?

A conspectus of all the aforesaid provisions shows that the moment the seat is designated, it is akin to an exclusive jurisdiction clause. On the facts of the present case, it is clear that the seat of arbitration is Mumbai and Clause 19 further makes it clear that jurisdiction exclusively vests in the Mumbai courts. Under the Law of Arbitration, unlike the Code of Civil Procedure which applies to suits filed in courts, a reference to “seat” is a concept by which a neutral venue can be chosen by the parties to an arbitration clause. The neutral venue may not in the classical sense have jurisdiction – that is, no part of the cause of action may have arisen at the neutral venue and neither would any of the provisions of Section 16 to 21 of the CPC be attracted. In arbitration law however, as has been held above, the moment “seat” is determined, the fact that the seat is at Mumbai would vest Mumbai courts with exclusive jurisdiction for purposes of regulating arbitral proceedings arising out of the agreement between the parties. 21. It is well settled that where more than one court has jurisdiction, it is open for parties to exclude all other courts.

 REPORTABLE 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

 CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5370-5371 OF 2017

INDUS MOBILE DISTRIBUTION PRIVATE LIMITED … V

 DATAWIND INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS

Citation:AIR 2017 SC 2105,2018(1) MHLJ 104,(2017) 7 SCC 678

Print Page