SC restored the order of District Court affirming that the jurisdiction of Sec. 34 of ACA is where the arbitration award was passed or in the place where the seat of arbitration was agreed by the parties – Quippo Construction Equipment Ltd. Vs. Janardan Nirman Pvt. Ltd. – Supreme Court
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in the present case the arbitration in question is a domestic and an institutional arbitration where CIAA was empowered to and did nominate the Arbitrator. It is not as if there were completely different mechanisms for appointment of Arbitrator in each of the agreements. The only distinction is that according to one of the agreements the venue was to be at Kolkata. The specification of “place of arbitration” may have special significance in an International Commercial Arbitration, where the “place of arbitration” may determine which curial law would apply. However, in the present case, the applicable substantive as well as curial law would be the same.
