Arbitration jurisdiction and forum selection clause upheld where prior proceedings already settled the venue dispute.

The Calcutta High Court's jurisdiction to entertain questions on the legality and enforceability of the arbitral award was upheld in light of the earlier proceedings and the forum selection clause. The jurisdictional objection had already been examined in prior proceedings before the Calcutta High Court and the Madras High Court, and the appellant had not successfully overturned the adverse orders. Because the same court had earlier exercised jurisdiction under the Arbitration Act, the forum clause supported continuation before that court. Reopening the jurisdictional issue was therefore unwarranted, and no basis for interference was made out.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Calcutta High Court retained jurisdiction to entertain and decide the legality or enforceability of the arbitral award in view of the earlier proceedings and the forum selection clause.

Analysis: The jurisdictional objection had already been considered in earlier proceedings before the Calcutta High Court and the Madras High Court, and the appellant had not successfully challenged the adverse orders. The forum selection clause, coupled with the prior exercise of jurisdiction by the Calcutta High Court under the Arbitration Act, supported the conclusion that the same court could proceed with the award. In these circumstances, reopening the jurisdictional question was unwarranted and no ground for interference was made out.

Conclusion: The jurisdictional challenge failed, and the impugned order of the Calcutta High Court was not disturbed.

---