Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-11-07 dismissed

M/S ARIF AZIM CO. LTD vs M/S MICROMAX INFORMATICS FZE

Bench: 3 — Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra

In Brief

A company in Afghanistan sought court appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, against a UAE-based company for recovery of credit balance. The Court held that Part I of the Act applies only where arbitration takes place in India (by seat or Indian governing law). Here, the distributorship agreement expressly designated Dubai, UAE as the seat of arbitration with UAE curial law, and was governed by UAE law. Applying the Shashoua Principle, the Court concluded Dubai is the juridical seat, not merely a venue. Since neither the seat nor governing law is Indian, Indian courts lack jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed as unmaintainable.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Arbitration International Commercial Arbitration Seat of Arbitration Jurisdiction Conflict of Laws Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login