In the recent ruling of M/s. Kings Chariot v. Mr. Tarun Wadhwa, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi ruled that if an arbitration agreement does not specify an arbitration seat, the court’s jurisdiction will be determined according to Sections 16 to 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”).
This judgment is significant as it reaffirms two key principles: first, a general jurisdiction clause in a contract does not establish the seat or venue for arbitration; second, jurisdiction should be determined based on Sections 16 to 20 of the CPC when there is no agreed-upon seat of arbitration.
Our Counsel Sohil Shah and Associate Sushmita Pandey undertake a detailed legal analysis of this case in today’s litigation update
PioneerLegal LawAtPL Arbitration Jurisdiction LegalPrinciples ArbitrationAgreement ArbitrationSeat LawUpdate
Close
