In Homevista Decor & Furnishing Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Connect Residuary Pvt. Ltd, the Calcutta High Court departed from the views expressed by three High Courts and ruled that the designated venue of the arbitration cannot be the seat of the arbitration if parties have conferred exclusive jurisdiction elsewhere.
In view of conflicting decisions by various High Courts on the test to determine the seat of the arbitration in case of conflicting clauses in the agreement between the parties, it is important for parties to (i) expressly designate the ‘seat’ of the arbitration in the arbitration clause, and (ii) ensure that the exclusive jurisdiction clause is in line with the seat clause.
In today’s litigation update, our Principal Associate Sohil Shah and Associate Nidhi Chaudhary examine this case.
#PioneerLegal #LawAtPL #Arbitration #SeatofArbitration #DisputeResolution
#ExclusiveJurisdictionalClause #seatandvenuedebate #section11
