Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. As regard the frst issue, Mr. Jagtiani, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant, contended that after the Impugned Order was pronounced by the Learned Single Judge, the Supreme Court in the judgment of BGS SGS SOMA JV v.

NHPC LIMITED ("BGS SGS")6, had an occasion to consider and deal with an identical issue that arises herein. Mr.Jagtiani placed extensive reliance on this judgment as, according to him, it conclusively and categorically covers the frst issue in 6 (2020) 4 SCC 234 KPD/Nitin/SSP 12 / 45 COMAPL-516-2019-Final.doc favour of the Appellant. Mr.Jagtiani submitted that the Supreme Court decision considers all the relevant prior decisions including the decisions in BALCO and Indus Mobile and essentially holds that paragraph 96 of BALCO must be read consistently with the rest of that judgment and properly construed, BALCO holds that the Courts of the seat of the arbitration would have exclusive jurisdiction in relation to disputes arising in relation to the arbitration. He further submitted that in fact the Supreme Court in BGS SGS has considered the judgment in Indus Mobile and held that Indus Mobile also confrms this view of exclusive jurisdiction on the Court of the seat.