VISVA BHARTI Vs. SAKAR AND SARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant filed an application under section 34 of the arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge dismissed the said application on the ground that this court lacked territorial jurisdiction as the award was valued less than Rs. 10 lakh. The learned single Judge also considered the seven Judge Bench decision in the case of SBP and Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd. and Ann, reported in 2005 (8) SCC 618. His Lordship distinguished the said decision and held that the ratio decided therein had no application in the instant case inasmuch as an application under section 11 (6) was not covered by section 42 of the said act of 1996.

(2.) HENCE, this appeal by the appellant.

(3.) MR. Debraj Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal contends that once the Apex Court in the case of SBP Co. held that any order passed under section 11 (6) would be treated as judicial order that would automatically debar any other Court other than the High Court to entertain any further application under said Act of 1996 including the application under section 34 in view of the non obstanti clause stipulated in section 42. In support of his contention Mr. Bhattacharjee has relied on a single bench decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Damayanti Builders v. Union of India reported in 2003 (3) ARBLR 530 where on an identical issue the Delhi High Court observed that section 34 application would lie to the high Court and not any other Court.