SANJIB BANERJEE, J.

The extent of the applicability of the dictum in a recent Supreme Court judgment falls for consideration here. The appellants insist that the interpretation rendered in the relevant judgment as to the territorial jurisdiction of a court receiving a matter under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is absolute and not open to question; the respondents assert that the ratio decidendi in the judgment reported at (2017) 7 SCC 678 (Indus Mobile Distribution Private Limited v. Datawind Innovations Private Limited) is contrary to the statute and contrary to the very Constitution Bench judgment that it relies on to propound the rule.

2. These appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated December 15, 2017 rendered by the Arbitration Court, where the dictum in Indus Mobile was found to be inapplicable.

3. The matter involves the interpretation of Section 2(1)(e) of the said Act and how such provision has been seen in Indus Mobile. Section 2(1)(e) of the said Act, prior to the 2015 Amendment, and post-2015 Amendment Section 2(1)(e)(i) are materially similar :

“2. Definitions. – (1) In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires,

(a)…

(b)…

(c)…

(d)…

(e