Until courts stop treating boilerplate jurisdiction clauses as “embedded” seat designations, the conundrum of Indian arbitration will persist. The ghost of BALCO has not yet been exorcised; it has merely found a new home in the “exclusive jurisdiction” clause.

The article urges a larger bench of the Supreme Court to address the conflation of venue and seat in arbitration clauses.

The author examines a recent ruling of the Supreme Court and highlights its re-affirmation to the principle of party autonomy.