https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314286 Territorial jurisdiction for a post-award challenge under the MSMED Act and section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act depended on the parties' contractual forum clause. The Delhi HC treated the Facilitation Council's sitting at Kanpur as the venue only, not the seat of arbitration, and held that the exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of Delhi courts continued to govern the court forum for the challenge. Although the MSMED Act overrides the agreed arbitral procedure, it did not displace the contractual stipulation on territorial jurisdiction for judicial proceedings after the award. The order rejecting the petition for want of territorial jurisdiction was therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 27 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2024 00:40:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314286 Territorial jurisdiction for a post-award challenge under the MSMED Act and section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act depended on the parties' contractual forum clause. The Delhi HC treated the Facilitation Council's sitting at Kanpur as the venue only, not the seat of arbitration, and held that the exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of Delhi courts continued to govern the court forum for the challenge. Although the MSMED Act overrides the agreed arbitral procedure, it did not displace the contractual stipulation on territorial jurisdiction for judicial proceedings after the award. The order rejecting the petition for want of territorial jurisdiction was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314286