Synopsis

The dispute arose from a written contract between Kirloskar Pneumatic and ONGC which fixed the seat of arbitration at Ankleshwar (the place where the Letter of Intent was issued). The contract also contained an amendment clause requiring any variation to be in writing, dated, expressly referring to the contract, and signed by authorised representatives. During the arbitration proceedings, the learned Presiding Arbitrator in the preliminary meeting recorded that “with the consent of learned counsel/advocates for the parties, it was decided that the seat of arbitration shall be at Ahmedabad”. All subsequent proceedings were held at Ahmedabad, and the award was signed and delivered there. ONGC filed a Section 34 application before the Commercial Court at Ankleshwar. Kirloskar raised a preliminary objection that the seat had shifted to Ahmedabad, conferring exclusive jurisdiction on the courts there. The Commercial Court rejected the objection. Kirloskar filed a writ petition under Article 227 before the Gujarat High Court. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the minutes of the preliminary meeting did not constitute a valid mutual agreement to change the seat under Section 20(1) because the contract required any amendment to be in writing signed by the parties. The statement in the minutes was merely a convenient venue under Section 20(3), not a change of the juridical seat.

Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad

Coram: Hon’ble The Chief Justice Mrs. Justice Sunita Agarwal and Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.N. Ray (Division Bench)

Date of Judgment: 8th May, 2026

Citation: Special Civil Application No. 4277 of 2026 (unreported)

Core Law: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 20 (place/seat of arbitration), 2(1)(e) (definition of court), 4 (waiver); Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Section 8 (bar against revision/interlocutory orders); Constitution of India – Article 227

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of gujarat at ahmedabad

Special civil application no. 4277 of 2026

Kirloskar pneumatic company limited (petitioner) vs. Oil and natural gas corporation limited (respondent)

Coram: hon’ble the chief justice mrs. justice sunita agarwal and hon’ble mr. justice d.n. ray

Reserved on: 6th april, 2026; pronounced on: 8th may, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

Arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 – section 20 (place of arbitration – sub-section (1) for parties’ agreement on seat, sub-section (2) for tribunal’s determination in absence of agreement, sub-section (3) for venue – convenient place for hearings), section 2(1)(e) (definition of “court” – principal civil court having jurisdiction over subject-matter of arbitration, interpreted as seat-centric), section 4 (waiver of right to object)

Commercial courts act, 2015 – section 8 (bar against revision or petition against any interlocutory order of a commercial court, including order on issue of jurisdiction)

Constitution of india, 1950 – article 227 (power of superintendence of high court over subordinate courts)

Subject matter of the judgment:

Whether the “seat” of arbitration agreed in a written contract can be altered by a statement recorded in the minutes of a preliminary arbitral meeting, when the contract itself contains an amendment clause requiring any variation to be in writing and signed by the parties. Whether such a statement amounts to a mutual agreement under Section 20(1) or merely a convenient “venue” under Section 20(3). Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition under Article 227 challenging an interlocutory order on jurisdiction passed by a Commercial Court, in light of Section 8 of the Commercial Courts Act.

Key legal principles applied:

Distinction between seat and venue under Section 20: Sections 20(1) and 20(2) refer to the “juridical seat” of arbitration, which determines the courts having exclusive supervisory jurisdiction. Section 20(3) refers only to “venue” – a convenient place for conducting hearings, which does not affect the seat. The

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