https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160277 Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, the ordinary rule is that an award is filed in the court having jurisdiction over a suit concerning the subject-matter of the reference. However, section 31(4) overrides that rule by vesting exclusive jurisdiction in the court where an application in the reference has already been made, if that court was competent to entertain it. On the facts described, the reference proceedings, later application, appointment of a successor arbitrator, and further directions showed that the SC retained control over the arbitration, so the award had to be filed there and not in the Delhi HC. en-us Tue, 29 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Aug 2014 18:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160277 Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, the ordinary rule is that an award is filed in the court having jurisdiction over a suit concerning the subject-matter of the reference. However, section 31(4) overrides that rule by vesting exclusive jurisdiction in the court where an application in the reference has already been made, if that court was competent to entertain it. On the facts described, the reference proceedings, later application, appointment of a successor arbitrator, and further directions showed that the SC retained control over the arbitration, so the award had to be filed there and not in the Delhi HC. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 29 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160277