https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172952 Where a contract expressly subjected all disputes to Indian law, the arbitration clause was treated as governed by the same law absent a clear contrary intention, so an award made in London was not a foreign award merely because of the place of arbitration. Jurisdiction to receive and file the award depended on whether the court could entertain a suit relating to the subject matter; it was sufficient that the respondent carried on business within the Bombay High Court's territorial limits, and prior related proceedings had been filed there. Because the arbitration had commenced before the 1996 Act, the saving provision preserved the filing remedy notwithstanding repeal. en-us Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:04:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172952 Where a contract expressly subjected all disputes to Indian law, the arbitration clause was treated as governed by the same law absent a clear contrary intention, so an award made in London was not a foreign award merely because of the place of arbitration. Jurisdiction to receive and file the award depended on whether the court could entertain a suit relating to the subject matter; it was sufficient that the respondent carried on business within the Bombay High Court's territorial limits, and prior related proceedings had been filed there. Because the arbitration had commenced before the 1996 Act, the saving provision preserved the filing remedy notwithstanding repeal. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172952