Section 42 exclusivity in arbitration barred a later Section 9 application after the first filing had been made

Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act confers exclusive seisin on the court where the first application under Part I is filed, so later applications arising from the same arbitration agreement must be presented there. The earlier application concerning the same dispute was the first in point of time, and the jurisdiction clause also supported exclusive jurisdiction at New Delhi, with the record showing relevant performance and escrow links there. On that basis, the later Section 9 application before another court could not be entertained and was held to be barred by Section 42.

---

---

Issues: Whether the original application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was barred by Section 42 of the Act because an earlier application concerning the same arbitration agreement and subject matter had already been made before another court.

Analysis: Section 42 gives exclusive seisin to the court where the first application under Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is made, and all subsequent applications arising out of the same arbitration agreement must be presented in that court. The earlier petition before the Delhi High Court was the first application in point of time concerning the same dispute. The agreement between the parties also contained a jurisdiction clause conferring exclusive jurisdiction on courts or tribunals in New Delhi, and the record showed that part of the performance and the escrow arrangement were connected with New Delhi. In these circumstances, the earlier proceeding could not be treated as one before a court lacking jurisdiction, and the later application could not be entertained by another court.

Conclusion: The original application was barred by Section 42 and was not maintainable.

---