STATE OF BIHAR Vs. PARAS NATH PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants --first party preferred a civil revision application challenging the validity of the order dated 9-11-1976 passed by second Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur.

(2.) THE opposite party No. 1, Paras Nath Pandey, filed an application under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (Act 10 of 1940) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the court of first Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur, on 28-9-1972 which was registered as title suit No. 177 of 1972. THE opposite party, Paras Nath Pandey, filed this application for passing a decree in terms of the award. Later on the application was transferred for hearing before the first Additional Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur, THE defendants -- first party filed an application under Section 33 of the Act on 13-2-1974 before the first Additional Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur. THE plaintiff (Paras Nath Pandey) raised an objection about the maintainability of the miscellaneous case. By the order dated 25-6-1974 the first Additional Subordinate Judge upheld the validity of the petition filed by the defendant first party before him. Later on the case was again transferred to the court of Second Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur, for disposal. In the court of second Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur, the plaintiff again filed an application on 31st Aug. 1976 in respect of the maintainability of the petition filed by the defendant first party under Section 33 of the Act. THE main objection of the plaintiff was that the first Additional Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 33 of the Act as it was not a court within the purview of Section 31 (4) of the Act.

(3.) WHITE I agree with the judgment of my learned brother that this application must fail, I would like to add a few observations of my own. From the facts, already stated by my learned brother, it is clear that the application under Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act was filed in the court of the first Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur and that the title suit in question, which was registered on that application, was therefore transferred to the court of the first Additional Subordinate Judge under the orders of the District Judge. There an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act was filed by the petitioners -- State of Bihar. A preliminary objection was taken by the opposite party that the court of the first Additional Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the said application. The learned Additional Subordinate Judge .accepted the objection and, by the impugned order, has held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by the petitioner under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act.