Bombay High Court Appoints Arbitrator in Partnership Dispute, Holds Substantial Connection with Mumbai Justifies Jurisdiction

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Vinod Kumar Saraf v. Villayati Ram Mittal & Anr.

• Citation: Commercial Arbitration Application (L) No. 15107 of 2026 (2026:BHC-OS:18406)

• High Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, Commercial Division

• Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amit Borkar

• Date of Judgment: 18th August, 2026

• Area of Law: Arbitration, Section 11, Territorial Jurisdiction, Partnership Dispute

Judgment Headline

Court appoints arbitrator, holds Section 11 application maintainable despite Section 42 arguments.

The Judgment in One Line

Bombay High Court appointed arbitrator in partnership dispute, finding substantial cause of action arose within its territorial jurisdiction.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment clarifies the interplay between territorial jurisdiction and Section 42 of the Arbitration Act in Section 11 applications. It distinguishes between applications made to a "Court" (Section 9, 34) and the High Court exercising power under Section 11. The ruling establishes that Section 42 does not automatically apply to Section 11 applications merely because a Section 9 petition was filed elsewhere. It also clarifies that the Court's enquiry under

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.