ASHOK KUMAR SINGH Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition raises an issue of law as to whether any Subordinate Judge, other than Subordinate Judge-I, of a District could be treated as the "Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in the District" as appearing in the definition of the term 'Court' in Section 2(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) It appears that a Partition Suit bearing No. 94 of 1981 was filed by late Bhupal Singh and others in the Court of Subordinate Judge-I, Muzaffarpur, for partition of Schedule 1 and 2 properties as per description in the plaint in which late Raj Narain Singh was the defendant and on account of whose death his legal representatives were brought on record. It appears from the impugned order that the parties decided to opt for arbitration and appointed their own arbitrators and placed the fact of going to arbitration by appointing arbitrators through several petitions filed before the Court which was seized with the above noted partition suit. It appears that the suit was pending before Sub-ordinate Judge-H, Muzaffarpur. Its, proceedings were stayed by the Presiding Officer of the Court in the light of information given to it that the parties had submitted their disputes by mutual agreement to a set of arbitrators. One of the arbitrators died during the pendency of the arbitration proceeding, but the same was continued by the remaining arbitrators and, accordingly, they passed an award and submitted the same before the Court of Sub-ordinate Judge-II, Muzaffarpur, on 24-5-1994. The parties were handed out the copies of the award on 4-6-1999.

(3.) Admittedly, no objection was raised to the award or any of its clauses before the Subordinate Judge-II. However, Miscellaneous Case bearing No. 13 of 1999 was filed by the petitioners before Sub-ordinate Judge-I, Muzaffarpur, raising the objection to the award passed by the arbitrators in Partition Suit No. 94 of 1981 with a prayer to reject the award. Because the Court did not receive any objection under Section 34 of the Act from any of the parties, if accepted the award and the same was put to execution by registering Execution, Case No. 2 of 2002 for enforcing the award in the light of Section 36 of the Act as the provision required the award to be enforced as if it were the decree of a Civil Court. The execution proceedings were initiated by Subordinate Judge-II, Muzaffarpur. in the above noted execution case. Thereafter, the petitioners raised their objection on disposal of the execution case pointing out to the Court of Subordinate Judge-II, Muzaffarpur, that they had already filed a Miscellaneous case bearing No. 13 of 1999 before Subordinate Judge-I, Muzaffarpur, and as the objections were awaiting disposal in the light of the provision of Section 34 of the Act, the award was not final having taken the shape of the decree of a civil Court so as to be enforced under the Code of Civil Procedure.