(1.) AN arbitration has taken place between the petitioner and the respondents in relation to a commercial transaction. An Arbitrator from Chennai was chosen and he passed an award, dated 06. 04. 2001 for a sum of Rs. 17,63,255/- in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an execution petition before the Court of the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam with a prayer to transfer the decree to the Court of the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy district. It was alleged that the respondents own several items of property within the jurisdiction of the District Court, Ranga Reddy District. The learned district Judge passed an order, dated 17. 06. 2002, refusing to entertain the execution petition, on the ground that it has no jurisdiction. The same is challenged in this civil revision petition.
(2.) SRI K. Someswar Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the court of the Principal District Judge answers the description of "court" as defined under Section 2 (e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') and that being so, the request of the petitioner ought to have been acceded to. He contends that once a decree is enforceable in the Court of district Judge, Visakhapatnam, by that very logic and reasoning, it is capable for being transferred to the Court of the Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy district.
(3.) THOUGH the respondents are served with notice, they have not chosen to enter appearance.