- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) The present appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack dated 16th July, 1999. Under which the High Court set aside the order passed by the District Judge and allowed the revision and confirmed the order passed by the lower Court with the modification that the respondent shall pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- at a time instead of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The number of grounds have been raised challenging the order of the High Court but for the purpose of disposal of the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has confined it to the question, whether on the facts and circumstances of the case it is the Court of Calcutta or the Court of Orissa which has the jurisdiction to decide the issues raised. In order to appreciate this we are hereby giving certain essential facts. Respondent obtained a bus on lease dated 14th August, 1977. The period of lease being 36 months on payment of monthly lease rental in 35 months. The said lease period came to an end on the 14th August, 2000. It is not in dispute that the respondent defaulted in making the payment of the instalments and in spite of demand the payment has not been made. As per Cl. 33 of the said agreement, the matter was referred to the sole arbitrator,an advocate of Calcutta for deciding the dispute. In spite of notice none appeared for the respondent. The appellant made an application under S. 9 of the Arbitration Act, 1966 before the City Civil Court, Calcutta for appointment of Receiver for taking over the possession of the suit vehicle who was appointed. Subsequently, the arbitrator passed an award in favour of the appellant which is not in dispute consequently the Receiver took over the possession of the said vehicle on 19th December, 1998.;