In Brief
The Supreme Court held that when an arbitration agreement expressly designates a seat, the courts at that seat have exclusive jurisdiction over all arbitral proceedings and applications under the Arbitration Act, 1996. Even if an application is filed first in another court (having jurisdiction over part of the cause of action), that court lacks jurisdiction if the seat is designated elsewhere. Section 42 of the Act does not cure this jurisdictional defect. The judgment overruled contrary law laid down by the Bombay and Delhi High Courts and transferred section 34 petitions from Faridabad to Delhi High Court, as the parties had designated New Delhi as the seat.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.