Meaning Of "Court" In Domestic Arbitration: A Conundrum That Needs To Be Simplified

There's been a longstanding dichotomy around the jurisdiction of courts for litigation arising out of arbitration agreements, i.e. the courts at the seat of arbitration and courts where the cause of action has arisen, as per the Civil Procedure Code.

From the bare perusal of the existing definition of "court" stipulated in Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it is manifest that any court which has jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the 'subject-matter of the arbitration, if the same had been the 'subject-matter of a suit', shall be considered as a 'court' for the purpose of the Arbitration Act.

It's been a matter of concern as to whether the "seat" of the arbitration is the only place where the parties can seek reliefs or does the "cause of action" also entails territorial jurisdiction as per Sections 16 to 20 of the Civil Procedure Code?