K C AGARWALA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision, petitioner challenges the order dated 11-5-1982 of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar returning the award to the Arbitration Tribunal for filing the same in proper Court. The impugned order reads as follows :-

(2.) The Arbitration Tribunal after making the award filed it in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar which was received in the court on 27-4-1982. It was registered as Original Suit No. 141 of 1982 (1). This was returned back by the impugned order to the Arbitration Tribunal for filing the same in proper Court. Before returning the award the petitioner was not given any chance of hearing.

(3.) The impugned order is not a speaking order. From the cause title it is seen that the State of Orissa is the defendant. The capital of the State Government, the defendant is Bhubaneswar. A Court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit where the defendant resides. In respect of the State Government, its capital is the place of its residence. Merely because, the Executive Engineer represents the State of Orissa it does not mean that the defendant resides beyond the jurisdiction of the court. However, there being no speaking order I am only assuming facts from the cause title. It is not possible to ascertain as to the reason for which the trial court held that the cause of action did not arise within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.