THE ICFAI UNIVERSITY

THE ICFAI LAW SCHOOL

DEHRADUN

ASSIGNMENT
ON
JURISDICTION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AND ARBITRAL
AWARDS

NAME: SMRITI SINGH Submitted to:

E.ID: 17FLICDDN02130 AYUSHI MITTAL
COURSE: BA.LLB(Hons.) Faculty Associate
Batch : 2017-2022 ICFAI Law School
Section : C
Subject ; IBDRM

1
 INDEX
SNO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
01. Introduction 03
02. Scope and effect of jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal 03
03. Execution under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 04
1996

04. Section 16 04

05. Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal when contract 05

containing arbitration clause declared void

06. Loss of competence of arbitral tribunal to rule on its 06

own jurisdiction

07. Arbitral award 08

08. Jurisdiction for enforcement of arbitral award 08

09. Appeal of arbitral awards 08

10. Procedure to apply for setting aside arbitral awards 09

11. Appropriate court for execution of arbitral awards 10

12. Limitation period 11

13. Stamping and registration of award 11
14. The arbitration and conciliation act 2015 11
15. The arbitration and conciliation bill 2018 12
16. Conclusion 13
17. Bibliography 14

INTRODUCTION
2
The matter of jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal corresponds to Art.16 of the UNCITRAL Model
Law and also to Art.21 of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. Under the English Arbitration
Act, 1996 there are similar provisions to those of s.16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996. Arbitration was devised as a method to circumvent the ills plague the process of civil
litigation in courts. In India it existed early on in the form of panchayats, which consisted of
people who were asked to decide on matters brought before them, and their decisions were
accepted by the parties to the dispute. The British, for the first time under their rule, made use
of the principle of arbitration in the Bengal regulations of 1772 and 1780. And in 1813
provisions regarding arbitration of disputes were made applicable to immovable property. 
And in 1940, the Arbitration Act was enacted, which repealed the Arbitration Act of 1899.
These statutes aimed to institutionalise the process of arbitration in India. But over a period of
time it was found that the Arbitration Act of 1940 was not enough to meet the needs of a fast-
changing India. Therefore in 1996 it was replaced by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides the parties abundant freedom in matters
such as the matter of choosing the place of arbitration, fixing the number of arbitrators,
appointment of arbitrators etc. They are even free to determine the matters which they want
to submit to the arbitral tribunal formed by their choice. But sometimes a problem whether
the Arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction, may arise. One of the parties may claim that the Arbitral
Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the dispute between them. In fact this happened often
under the old Arbitration Act, 1940 where the mere allegation of the invalidity of the main
contract would provide jurisdiction to the courts to decide whether a valid arbitration
agreement existed between the parties to the dispute. And this delayed the process of
arbitration a lot, thus defeating the purpose of arbitration . Now, under the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 power has been given to the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 (1) to
rule on its jurisdiction, including ruling on any objections with respect to the existence or
validity of the arbitration agreement.

But does the Arbitral Tribunal have the competence to make a binding decision on its own
jurisdiction, including the decision ruling on any objections with respect to the existence or
validity of an arbitration agreement? Will the Arbitral Tribunal lose jurisdiction if the
contract in which the arbitration agreement (clause) is inserted, is declared void? It is the
answers to these questions that are sought to be found out.

SCOPE AND EFFECT OF JURISDICTION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

This is a new authority conferred on the arbitral tribunal to decide its own jurisdiction by
itself. Though by the provisions of this section the autonomy or separability of the arbitration
clause has been statutorily recognized, yet there ought to have been some limits on the power
of the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction, such as “competence/competence”.

In Olympus Superstructures Pvt.Ltd v. Meena Vijay Khetan, 1it has been held that under
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the arbitral tribunal is vested with power under
s.16(1) to rule on its own jurisdiction including ruling on any objection with respect to the
existence or validity of arbitration agreement.

1
1999

3
EXECUTION UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION
ACT , 1996
Section 2(1)(e) of the Act defines 'Court' and Section 42 which provides for jurisdiction
determines the Court to which all applications under Part I of the Act are made before, during
or after arbitral proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while interpreting these provisions
held that the expression 'with respect to an arbitration agreement' widens the scope of Section
42 to include all matters which directly or indirectly pertain to an arbitration agreement.

Section 36 of the Act likens an Arbitral Award to a Decree of the Civil Court and therefore
provides for it to straightaway be executed to realize the decretal amount. However, there is
no provision in the Act which likens the Arbitral Tribunal to a Court which passed the
Decree. There is also no provision for an Arbitral Tribunal to execute its own Award.
Inevitably, the Decree has to be brought for execution before an executing Court. As per the
Code, a decree can be executed by the Court which passes the decree or where the Judgment
Debtor is residing or carrying on business or having immovable property. However, the Act
of 1996 is special law which prevails over the general provisions of the Code35.

In view of this, a doubt is raised as to whether an Award can be executed under Section 36 of
the Act in any jurisdiction different to the place where the Award has been passed, without
requiring such award to be transferred to the executing Court by the competent Court as per
Section 42.

SECTION 16 STATES

Competence of arbitral tribunal to rule on its jurisdiction—

1. The arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, including ruling on any
objections with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration
agreement, and for that purpose,—

a. an arbitration clause which forms part of a contract shall be treated as

an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract; and
b. a decision by the arbitral tribunal that the contract is null and void shall
not entail ipso jure the invalidity of the arbitration clause.
2. A plea that the arbitral tribunal does not have jurisdiction shall be raised not
later than the submission of the statement of defence; however, a party shall
not be precluded from raising such a plea merely because that he has
appointed, or participated in the appointment of, an arbitrator.
3. A plea that the arbitral tribunal is exceeding the scope of its authority shall be
raised as soon as the matter alleged to be beyond the scope of its authority is
raised during the arbitral proceedings.
4. The arbitral tribunal may, in either of the cases referred to in sub-section (2) or
sub-section (3), admit a later plea if it considers the delay justified.
5. The arbitral tribunal shall decide on a plea referred to in sub-section (2) or
sub-section (3) and, where the arbitral tribunal takes a decision rejecting the
plea, continue with the arbitral proceedings and make an arbitral award.
6. A party aggrieved by such an arbitral award may make an application for
setting aside such an arbitral award in accordance with section 34.

Interim measures ordered by arbitral tribunal—

4
 7. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request
of a party, order a party to take any interim measure of protection as the
arbitral tribunal may consider necessary in respect of the subject-matter of the
dispute.
8. The arbitral tribunal may require a party to provide appropriate security in
connection with a measure ordered under sub-section (1).

JURISDICTION OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL WHEN CONTRACT

CONTAINING ARBITRATION CLAUSE DECLARED VOID
There may be instances when the arbitration agreement may not be made as a separate
agreement. Instead, it may be embedded, or inserted, as a clause, in the contract between the
parties. And it may happen that the agreement or the contract between the parties is declared
void or illegal. What happens to the agreement in such cases? Will the arbitration clause in
such cases become void?

In the case of Jawaharlal Burman vs. Union of India 2it was stated:

“It is, therefore, theoretically possible, that a contract may come to an end and the arbitration
contract may not. It is also theoretically possible that the arbitration agreement may be void
and yet the contact may be valid; and in that sense there is a distinction between the
arbitration agreement and the contract of which it forms a part; but in the present case, the
challenge to the contract itself involves a challenge to the arbitration agreement; if there is a
concluded contract the arbitration agreement is valid. If there is not a concluded contract the
arbitration agreement is invalid indeed, we apprehend that in a very large majority of cases
where the arbitration agreement is a part of the main contract itself, challenge to the existence
or validity of one would mean a challenge to the existence or validity of the other.”

In the case of Jaikishan Dass Mull vs. Luchhiminarain Kanoria & Co.  3it was stated by
the court:

 “ If one party to the alleged contract is contending that it is void ab initio, the arbitration
clause cannot operate, for on this view the clause itself is void”. The arbitration clause being
an integral part of the contract cannot stand, if the contract itself is held to be illegal.”

But the position has changed now. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act was enacted in 1996.
And Section 16 (1) of this Act states that the arbitration clause if inserted in a contract shall
be considered to be an independent from the rest of the contract and a decision by the Arbitral
Tribunal that the contract is null and void shall not entail ipso jure the invalidity of the
arbitration clause.

And in the case of National Agricultural Coop. Marketing Federation India Ltd. vs.
Gains Trading Ltd.  4it was stated that a decision that the contract is null and void shall not
entail ipso jure the invalidity of the arbitration clause.

Thus we see that though the invalidity of the main clause affected the validity of the
arbitration clause inserted in it earlier, now the law has changed after insertion of Section
16(1) into the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. And now the invalidity of the main
2
1971
3
1974
4
2003

5
contract does not result in the invalidity of the arbitration clause inserted in it, ipso jure
because of the application of the doctrine of separability, which results in the arbitration
clause being treated as independent from the main contract.

LOSS OF COMPETENCE OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO RULE ON ITS OWN

JURISDICTION

There may be certain instances when the Arbitral Tribunal may lose the competence to rule
on its jurisdiction.

Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act states that a party may request the
Chief Justice or his designate to take required steps when under an appointment procedure
agreed to by the parties, one of them fails to act as required under the procedure, or the
parties or the two arbitrators fail to reach an agreement expected of them under the procedure,
or a person or institution fails to perform a function entrusted to him under such procedure.
And section 11(7) states that a decision taken by the Chief justice or his designate under
section 11(4), section 11(5) or section 11(6) shall be final. Which means that the arbitral
tribunal cannot look into the question of its own jurisdiction when the Chief Justice has
looked into it earlier.

But in the case of SBP and Co. vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. 5it was stated that the Arbitral
tribunal could not rule on its own jurisdiction once it had been appointed by the Chief Justice.
It was stated:

“The question, in the context of sub-section (7) of Section 11 is, what is the scope of the
right conferred on the Arbitral Tribunal to rule upon its own jurisdiction and the existence of
the arbitration clause, envisaged by section 16(1), once the Chief Justice or the person
designated by him had appointed an arbitrator after satisfying himself that the conditions for
the exercise of power to appoint an arbitrator are present in the case. Prima facie, it would be
difficult to say that in spite of the decision of the Chief Justice, the Arbitral tribunal can still
go behind that decision and rule on its own jurisdiction or on the existence of an arbitration
clause.

Section 16 cannot be held to empower the Arbitral tribunal to ignore the decision given by
the judicial authority or the Chief justice before the reference to it was made. The competence
to decide does not enable the Arbitral tribunal to get over the finality conferred to an order
passed prior to its entering upon the reference by the very statute that creates it.”

This case overruled the judgment given in the case of Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. vs.
Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd 

Thus we see that if the Chief Justice or his designate has looked into the existence of the
arbitration clause and on its jurisdiction then the Arbitral Tribunal cannot look into the
question of its jurisdiction. It would in such a case be barred from looking into the matter of
its jurisdiction.

5
2007

6
The honourable court interpreted the intention of the plea of non-jurisdiction of an arbitral
tribunal under section16(5) of the Act in the case of Union of India vs. M/s. East Coast
6
 where the court held that.

“From the scheme of the Act, it is apparent that the legislature did not provide appeal
against the order under section 16(5) where the arbitral tribunal takes a decision
rejecting the plea that the arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction. The intention appears to
be that in such case; the arbitral tribunal shall continue with the arbitral proceedings
and make an award without delay and without being interfered in the arbitral process
at that stage by any court in their supervisory role.

An arbitral tribunal cannot be said to have a statutory jurisdiction. The tribunal makes and
decides its own jurisdiction to fit the requirements of the parties. The arbitral agreement
decides the scope and extent of jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal. The principal of party-
autonomy states that when two parties have the right to settle their disputes on their own then
they have the right to present this right to any third party, to decide overt that dispute.

Thus it is extremely important to consider a well-drafted agreement because it ensures giving

full power to the tribunal to decide matters regarding the jurisdiction. The Arbitration and
Conciliation Act 1996 additionally mentions the jurisdiction over deciding certain matters in
Section 17 of the Act.

1. Appoint a guardian for minor/unsound person during the process of arbitration

2. Protection/Preservation/ Detention/ temporary injunction of the subject matter of the
arbitration.
There are certain cases in which the competence of the arbitral tribunal subject to getting
questioned.

Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd 7.held that an order under Section 11 of the Act
was an “administrative order”. This would mean that no appeal could lie under Article 136(1)
of the Constitution. This case showcases a clear reluctance on the part of the Court to
impinge upon the autonomy enjoyed by the arbitration process and by holding that the
function exercised by the Chief Justice was administrative, the Court essentially prohibited
the Chief Justice from ruling upon questions such as the existence or validity of the
arbitration agreement.

Arbitral award
In India, an arbitral award is the decision by an Arbitral Tribunal seated in India in
accordance with the substantive law for the time being in force in India, referred to as
‘Domestic award’. In international commercial arbitration, the arbitral award is issued by a
foreign seated arbitral tribunal, referred to as ‘Foreign Awards’. Section 44 of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act 1996 defines “foreign award” as an arbitral award, arising out of legal
relationships which are considered as commercial under the law in force in India, in one of
such territories which the Central Government notifies to the territories to which the said
Convention applies. India is a signatory to the New York Convention 1958 and the Geneva
Convention 1960.

6
2007
7
2004

7
In domestic arbitrations, the time limit set to the Arbitral tribunal for issuing the arbitral
award is twelve months from the date on which the Arbitrator/ all the arbitrators, as the case
may be, receive notice in writing of their appointment.

JURISDICTION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRAL AWARD

The procedure for enforcement and execution of decrees in India is governed by the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 while that of arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration &
Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”) as well as the CPC.

On the 15th of  February 2018 in Sundaram Finance v Abdul Samad & Anr, 8a two-Judge
Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) had erased the confusion
regarding the jurisdiction for the enforcement of the arbitral award. The Supreme Court
clearing this confusion mentioned that there any arbitral award under the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act of 1996 can be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction and that
getting a transfer order from any court. It was indeed a landmark judgment that increased the
scope and power of the arbitral tribunal.

APPEAL OF ARBITRAL AWARDS

There is no appeal of arbitral awards against the merits of the arbitral award. The Supreme
Court has observed, “an arbitrator is a judge appointed by the parties and as such an award
passed by him is not to be lightly interfered with.” In one of the recent judgments, the
Supreme Court held that the consideration of the award being satisfactory cannot solely be
decided on the basis of the whims of any person. This, however, does not make the arbitral
award absolute and does not prevent from questioning the product of arbitration.

Certain remedies are ensured by law to ensure proper conduct of proceedings. In The
repealed Arbitration and Conciliation act 1940 Act three remedies were mainly available
against an arbitration award- modification, remission and setting aside which has been further
mended by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the remedies have been
categorized into two parts. As far as the remedy for rectification of errors is concerned, it has
been handed over to the parties and the Tribunal to decide.

The remedy for setting aside has been changed and now the award after the process of the
Arbitration process will be returned back to the Tribunal for removal of defects. Section 34
provides certain grounds for setting aside the arbitral award which are incapacity, invalid
agreement, inefficiency on the part of one of the parties, the incongruity in the subject of the
arbitration proceeding and the arbitral award, discrepancy in the appointment of the
arbitrators, opposing the public policy, etc.

Each country has specific rules related to the setting aside or appealing of the arbitral award.
However, there are three major principals for challenging the arbitral award.

1. That the jurisdiction of the award does not let to a binding agreement between the
parties
2. The arbitral award can be challenged on the ground of substantive law, from the
utilization of different guidelines to the mistake or misrepresentation caused during the
process.
8
2009

8
 3. That there was some defect of a procedure of any part of arbitration from the
formation of the agreement to the creation of award or the selection of the arbitrator.

Procedure to apply for setting aside arbitral awards

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 provides recourse to the party against whom the
arbitral award is pronounced, for setting aside the arbitral award by prescribing separate
procedures for setting aside domestic and foreign awards.

In case of domestic award, an application under Section 34 of the Act is to be filed in the
Court before three months from the date on which the party making that application had
received the arbitral award. Section 34(3) allows the party a further period of 30 days after
the expiry of three months if the court is satisfied that the party was prevented by sufficient
cause from making the application. No application for setting aside the award can be
entertained by the court after the expiry of these additional thirty days.

A very important amendment in the 2015 Act introduces that a party challenging an award
under Section 34 will have to move a separate application in order to seek a stay on
enforcement and execution of the award. Prior to the Amendment, a Section 34 application
would automatically put a stay on the execution of the award.

In the case of International commercial arbitrations, there is no proviso for setting aside a
foreign award in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. The courts in India can either
enforce it or refuse to enforce it. The Supreme Court, in Venture Global Engineering vs
Satyam Computer Services Ltd and Anr9, has stated that a foreign award can be set aside
by an Indian Court u/s 34 of the Act.

Procedure to enforce the Arbitral awards

The procedure for enforcement and execution of the Domestic awards and Foreign awards is
governed primarily by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and the Code of Civil
Procedure 1908. Arbitral awards are enforced as a decree of the Court and principles of
natural justice apply to the execution proceedings. The execution of the domestic awards are
dealt with by the provisions of Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, while the
foreign awards are dealt with by Part II of the Act.

With regard to enforcement of domestic awards, after the period for filing the application
under section 34 for setting aside the arbitral award is over and irrespective of whether a
separate application under Section 34 is filed or not, Section 36 (as per 2015 Amendment
Act) mandates that the award shall be enforced as if it were a decree of the court as per the
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, unless the court grants an order of stay of the
operation of the arbitral award for payment of money on such a separate application with due
regard to Code of Civil Procedure 1908.

In case of a foreign award, the party, in whose favour the award is issued, has to follow a
three-step process for enforcement of the foreign award as per the Arbitration and
9
2008

9
Conciliation Act 1996. Firstly, the party shall make an application under section 47 and shall
produce documents and evidence along with the application. Secondly, the other party is to
raise a defence as per section 48 with evidence and thirdly, the court, if it is satisfied with the
evidence produced by the parties, decide on the enforceability of the award and enforce it
under section 49 of the Act.

As regards, filing the application under section 47 and production of documents and evidence
along with the application, the Supreme court in P.E.C Limited v. Austbulk Shipping 10has
interpreted the word ‘shall’ as occurring in the section as ‘may’ and also clarified that such
interpretation is restricted to only the initial stage of filing the application and not thereafter.
As such the mandatory need for production of documents and evidence at the time of filing
the application is relaxed.

Appropriate Court for the execution of the arbitral award

In case of domestic awards, the jurisdiction for the execution of arbitral awards would be the
Commercial Courts exercising such jurisdiction which would ordinarily lie before any
Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district, as well as the Commercial Division
of the High Court in the exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction.

In case of International commercial Arbitration with a seat outside India, where the subject
matter of a Foreign Award is money, the jurisdiction for the execution of arbitral award will
be with the Commercial Division of those High Courts, in whose jurisdiction, the assets of
the opposite party shall lie. In case the subject matter of the award is, otherwise, the
jurisdiction will lie with the Commercial Division of those High Court which would have
jurisdiction if the subject matter of the award was a subject matter of a suit.

In case of International Commercial Arbitration with seat in India, the subject matter being
money, the jurisdiction for the execution of arbitral awards will be with the Commercial
Division of those High Courts where the assets of the opposite party shall lie. In cases where
the subject matter of the award is other than money, the jurisdiction will lie with the
Commercial Division of those High Court which would have jurisdiction if the subject matter
of the award was a subject matter of a suit.

The Supreme Court, in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Abdul Samad and Anr 11, has stated that
‘the enforcement of an award through its execution can be filed anywhere in the country
where such decree can be executed and there is no requirement for obtaining a transfer of
decree from the Court, which would have jurisdiction over the arbitral proceedings’.

Limitation Period

Since domestic awards are executed as a decree of the court, the Limitation Act 1963 applies
to Arbitration and prescribes a period 12 years for enforcement of such an award. As regards
the execution of foreign award, different views have been expressed by the courts, some

10
2009
11
2009

10
deeming it as a decree and therefore a limitation of period of 12 years would be applicable,
whereas some courts are of the view that since there is no provision under the Limitation Act
for making an application for execution of a foreign award, such application will be governed
by the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act and therefore such application has to be
made within a period of three years and subsequently once the application is determined to be
enforceable in India, such decree can be executed within a period of twelve years as per
Article 136 of the Limitation Act.

Stamping and registration of awards

In case of domestic awards, Section 35 of the Stamp Act 1899 states that an award which is
not sufficiently stamped is inadmissible. The amount of the stamp duty varies from state to
state depending upon where the award is made. Also, under section 17 of the Registration Act
1908, it is mandatory for an award has to be registered if it affects the immovable property,
else will be rendered invalid.  In case of foreign awards, the Supreme court has held that a
Foreign award is not liable to be stamped and yet to be considered as valid.

The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2015

The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 came into force from 23rd October
2015. Although this amendment was enacted to amend lacunas in the parent act, it has in fact,
given rise to its own controversies. One of the most contentious issues was regarding the
applicability of the 2015 Amendment Act. Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment states that the
act shall apply to arbitral proceedings which have commenced on or after the date of
commencement of the act i.e. 23rd October 2015.

For instance, Section 34 application under the earlier 1996 Act would ensue an automatic
stay on the enforcement of an arbitral award. Now under the amended 2015 act, Section 36
states that there would be no automatic stay on the execution of the arbitral award in case of a
Section 34 application. So, in case the Arbitration proceedings commenced before 23rd
October 2015 and the award was pronounced after the date, then would the enforcement of
the arbitral awards per the amended section 36, despite the existence of Section 34
application, be allowed? Since Section 34 application is to be made in the Courts for setting
aside of an arbitral award, would it then, being a court proceeding, be out of the ambit of the
Arbitration proceedings as mentioned in Section 26? Such and other posing questions
earmarked the 2015 amendment to the parent act of 1996.

In light of further lacunas and ambiguity, the Supreme Court, in BCCI v. Kochi Cricket
12
ruled that the automatic stay of operation of the award under the amended Section 36 was
not a vested right and amended Section 36 would apply to Section 34 applications filed
before the commencement of the 2015 Act.

12
2007

11
The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill 2018

A further amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2015 was very
much essential to clear the ambiguities in the amendments introduced in the 2015 Act.
Among the other ambiguities, one of the major setbacks faced by the Amendment Act of
2015 was pertaining to its applicability to court proceedings where the arbitration
proceedings commenced before the amended act of 2015 came into effect. To address this
issue, Section 87 has been proposed in the Amendment Bill, 2018 which states that unless the
parties agree otherwise, the 2015 Amendment Act shall not apply to arbitral proceedings
commenced before the Amendment Act, 2015 coming into force i.e. prior to 23.10.2015 and
court proceedings arising out of or in relation to such arbitral proceedings irrespective of
whether such court proceedings are commenced prior to or after the commencement of
the Amendment Act, 2015.

The 2018 amendment bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 18th July 2018 and was passed
on 10th Aug 2018. The Bill is now pending approval of the Rajya Sabha.

CONCLUSION

In light of Above case judgment the law has been settled that while enforcing an award,
execution proceedings can be filed anywhere in the country where such decree can be
executed and there is no requirement for obtaining a transfer of the decree from the Court
which would have jurisdiction over the arbitral proceedings. The decision of the Arbitral
tribunal rejecting a plea regarding its jurisdiction is not appealable but its decision
regarding acceptance of plea about having no jurisdiction is appealable. And the
invalidity of the main contract no longer affects the arbitration clause which is
considered from the main contract. And when the Chief Justice has already looked
into the question of jurisdiction the Arbitral Tribunal cannot look into its jurisdiction
once again. One of the major challenges faced by the international community in the
resolution of disputes is the enforcement and execution of arbitral awards. In order to
ensure speedy resolution of disputes, it is imperative that the procedures for execution
of the awards are made unambiguous, time-efficient and cost-effective. Only then the
arbitration process as an alternative dispute resolution method will become a win-win
situation for the parties, the nation and the international community as a whole.

12
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOK
ARBITRATION BARE ACT 2019
WEBSITE
https://www.legalbites.in/
https://indiankanoon.in/

13
14
15