Territorial jurisdiction applies to foreign award enforcement where the Act is silent on forum rules and cause of action matters.

An application to file and enforce a foreign award under section 5(1) of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 was held to remain subject to the forum's procedural law where the Act is silent. The expression "subject-matter of the award" was read as the relief granted by the award, but it did not displace territorial jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Article III of the New York Convention was treated as requiring enforcement according to the procedural rules of the territory. As no party against whom enforcement was sought carried on business in Bhavnagar and no part of the cause of action arose there, Bhavnagar Court lacked jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether a court in India entertaining an application to file and enforce a foreign award under section 5(1) of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 must determine jurisdiction solely by reference to the subject-matter of the award, or whether territorial jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 remains relevant; and whether the Bhavnagar Court had jurisdiction on the facts.

Analysis: The expression "subject-matter of the award" was construed as the relief or reliefs granted by the award, but the Act did not define which court would have jurisdiction over that subject-matter. The Act was held to be a complete code only in respect of matters specifically provided for in it, while its silence on procedural matters required recourse to the rules of procedure of the forum. Article III of the New York Convention, which forms part of the Act, requires enforcement in accordance with the rules of procedure of the territory where the award is relied upon. On that basis, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure governing territorial jurisdiction were held applicable. Since none of the parties against whom enforcement was sought carried on business within Bhavnagar, no part of the cause of action arose there, and the jurisdictional basis accepted by the trial court was unsustainable.

Conclusion: The Bhavnagar Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 5(1) of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the order assuming jurisdiction was set aside, and the enforcement petition was ordered to be returned for presentation before the proper court.

Ratio Decidendi: An application under section 5(1) of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 is governed, on matters not expressly provided for in the Act, by the procedural law of the forum, including the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; therefore territorial jurisdiction is not excluded merely because the application concerns a foreign award.

---