In Brief
Two Indian companies arbitrated their warranty dispute under an ICC clause designating Zurich as the seat. The arbitral tribunal awarded against the claimant. The appellant challenged enforcement before the High Court, arguing Indian parties cannot arbitrate abroad. The Supreme Court held that Indian companies may validly choose foreign arbitration seats, and awards made there fall within 'foreign award' enforcement provisions of the Arbitration Act. The Court rejected arguments based on public policy and sections 23 and 28 of the Contract Act, finding party autonomy paramount. The award qualifies as enforceable under the New York Convention framework. The High Court's judgment upholding enforceability was affirmed, except insofar as it held applications under section 9 unmaintainable—such applications are held maintainable for foreign-seated arbitrations."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.