https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108711 The High Court of Delhi lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain a section 11 petition for appointment of an arbitrator because the tender was issued and accepted at Allahabad, where the agreement was executed. The contract's jurisdiction clause validly confined disputes to the courts at the place from which acceptance of tender was issued, and the parties could choose one competent court to the exclusion of others. The mere presence of some cause of action in Delhi, or an office of the respondents there, did not confer jurisdiction. The petition was therefore not maintainable in Delhi and was directed to be returned for presentation before the appropriate court at Allahabad. en-us Thu, 30 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:09:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108711 The High Court of Delhi lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain a section 11 petition for appointment of an arbitrator because the tender was issued and accepted at Allahabad, where the agreement was executed. The contract's jurisdiction clause validly confined disputes to the courts at the place from which acceptance of tender was issued, and the parties could choose one competent court to the exclusion of others. The mere presence of some cause of action in Delhi, or an office of the respondents there, did not confer jurisdiction. The petition was therefore not maintainable in Delhi and was directed to be returned for presentation before the appropriate court at Allahabad. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 30 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108711