https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157002 A contractual forum selection clause choosing Kolkata as the place of arbitration and jurisdiction was treated as binding where more than one court could otherwise entertain the dispute. The Supreme Court applied the principle that parties may validly agree to submit disputes to one among several competent courts, and such a clause does not offend Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 so long as it does not exclude all competent fora. Although part of the cause of action may have arisen in Gujarat, the parties' agreement and the high seas sale contract fixed Kolkata as the contractual forum, so proceedings in Bhavnagar were not maintainable. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jun 2014 10:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157002 A contractual forum selection clause choosing Kolkata as the place of arbitration and jurisdiction was treated as binding where more than one court could otherwise entertain the dispute. The Supreme Court applied the principle that parties may validly agree to submit disputes to one among several competent courts, and such a clause does not offend Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 so long as it does not exclude all competent fora. Although part of the cause of action may have arisen in Gujarat, the parties' agreement and the high seas sale contract fixed Kolkata as the contractual forum, so proceedings in Bhavnagar were not maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157002