The SC in Mankastu Impex Private Limited v. Airvisual Limited[1] held that in the absence of a clearly delineated proper and curial law for the arbitration proceedings, the seat of the arbitration proceedings will have to be determined from the other clauses in the arbitration agreement along with the conduct/intention of the parties. The SC interpreted the provisions of the contract, stating that the disputes “shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration administered in Hong Kong” was indicative of the intention of the parties to nominate Hong Kong as the seat of the arbitration proceedings. The seat would have exclusive supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitration proceedings and declined to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act.
[1] Mankastu Impex Private Limited v. Airvisual Limited, Arbitration Petition No. 32 of 2018, Supreme Court of India.