7. In Brahmani River Pellets Ltd. v. Kamachi Industries Ltd., this Court observed that:

“18. Where the contract specifies the jurisdiction of the court at a particular place, only such court will have the jurisdiction to deal with the matter and parties intended to exclude all other courts…

19… Since only the Orissa High Court will have the jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed under Section 11 (6) of the Act, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.”

8. Though clause 10 does not use the expression ‘seat’ or ‘venue’, we are of the opinion that the ‘jurisdiction’ is mentioned in the context of resolution of the disputes through arbitration and as such the agreement between the parties that, “client hereby submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Mumbai High Courts located in Mumbai” must be understood in the context of arbitration and therefore the seat of the arbitration must be taken to be Mumbai.