International Arbitration — Jurisdiction of Indian Court ousted — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 section 37(2)(b).

Though contractual work under work order has been carried out in territorial jurisdiction of India the parties had agreed to refer their dispute to arbitration in Singapore in accordance with Singapore International Arbitration Center (SAIC) Rules. According to the said Rule during subsisting of arbitration proceedings under such rules, law of arbitration shall be governed by the International Arbitration Act. Any of party aggrieved by any interim ruling or order of arbitrator, may resort remedy for under Rule 32 of SIAC Rules of the International Arbitration Act. International Arbitration Act (2002 Ed. Statutes of the Republic of Singapore), Chap. 143A, Rule 32 deals with Jurisdiction of the Court. Where parties agreed to refer dispute to arbitration in Singapore in accordance with SIAC rules, whereby during subsisting arbitration proceedings, jurisdiction of the Indian Court was expressly or impliedly ousted. Arbitration being carried out by arbitrator according with SIAC rules. Indian courts has no jurisdiction to entertain any appeal against award of arbitrator. After referring dispute to the arbitrator, parties could not be permitted to approach Court in India, specially when the parties are bound by SIAC Rules. The same cannot be challenged under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 or any other enactment except the International Arbitration Act. No appeal would lie u/s.37(2)(b) of the Act of 1996.