Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Rajasthan HC Flags Near-Zero Cut-Off for Teachers
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
ARUN MONGA,
YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT
M/S SUNDARAM FINANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
M/S NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY – Respondent
[2026:RJ-JD:6137-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 871/2024 M/s Sundaram Finance Limited, having its Registered Office At 21 Patullos Road Chennai India And Branch Office At 201 Second Floor Plot No 637/B Residency Road Bhansali Tower, Near Manidhari Hospital, Jodhpur Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Jitendra Mertiya So Shri Premaram Mertiya Aged About 35 Years R/o Behind Anand Cinema Sojati Gate Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant Versus
1. M/s National Construction Company, Represented By Its Partner Mr Khimji Bhai Harji Patel, Address Harsh Plaza 1St Floor Opposite Mandvi Octroi Naka Bhuj District Kachchh Gujarat.
2. Mr. Khimji Bhai Harji Patel, S/o Mr. Harji Devraj Patel Address 13 Didhamedar Colony Bhuj Dist Kachchh Gujarat.
3. Mr Bhikhalal Harji Patel S/o Harji Valji, (Since deceased)
through its legal representatives:-Click Here to Read the rest of this document
The main legal point established is that the Commercial Court has jurisdiction to entertain execution proceedings arising from an award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and the award holde....
An arbitral award resulting from a unilaterally appointed Arbitrator is void for lack of inherent jurisdiction, allowing the executing court to refuse enforcement.
The court affirmed that jurisdiction must be inherently valid and cannot be conferred by consent if lacking, emphasizing the importance of the location of the cause of action in arbitration agreement....
The court held that an exclusive jurisdiction clause cannot confer jurisdiction on a court lacking inherent authority, emphasizing the need for jurisdiction to align with the location of the cause of....
Unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator violates equal treatment principles and renders the award void ab initio under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The enforcement of an arbitral award can be initiated anywhere in the country where the decree can be executed, without requiring a transfer of decree from the court with jurisdiction over the arbitr....
The exclusive jurisdiction clause in a contract governs jurisdiction irrespective of the seat of arbitration or the place of hearings, emphasizing the primacy of contract in determining jurisdiction.
The seat of arbitration determines jurisdiction for enforcement of awards, allowing execution within that jurisdiction despite asset relocations, emphasizing the need for transparency in asset disclo....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article