(1.) THIS is an application taken out by the State for setting aside the Award dated 16. 12. 1991 passed by the sole arbitrator in respect of Tender No. 37/se (S) of 1982-83.
(2.) MR. Bagchi Senior Advocate, appearing for the State, takes a preliminary point contending that the award cannot be filed in this court because the entire cause of action arose outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. According to Mr. Bagchi this Court is not the proper Court where the award has to be filed and if the award cannot be entertained by this Court then this application for setting aside the award cannot be pressed in this Court.
(3.) MR. B. B. Sarkar, the Learned Advocate, appearing for the respondents, submits that by an order passed by this court dated 6. 7. 1988, this court appointed the sole arbitrator or an application under Sections 5, 8, 11, and 12 of the Arbitration Act. Pursuant to the said appointment made by this court the arbitrator had entered upon a Reference and proceeded with the same resulting in the said award which is now under challenge. Mr. Sarkar has cited a Supreme Court decision in State of Madhya pradesh v. M/s. Saith and Skelton (P) Ltd and Ors. reported in AIR 1972 SC 1506 to submit that since the arbitrator had been appointed by this court this is the court where the award ought to be filed and no other court. It is decided by the Supreme Court in this case that the Court which appoints an arbitrator to make an award is the court under Section 14 (2} where the award can validly be filed. It is also observed where the Appeal Court has appointed an arbitrator to make an award it is that Court in which the award can validly be filed and this is particularly so when that Court has not divested itself of its jurisdiction to deal with the award or the matters arising out of the award. This view has also been reiterated In another case by the Supreme court in Guru Nanak Foundation v. Ratan Singh and Sons AIR 1981 SC 2075.