D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against Order No. 31 dated 26th November, 1997 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta, in Misc. Case No. 183 of 1993 returning the award and the plaint in T. S. No. 1975 of 1992 for making the award rule of the Court together with the objection filed by the appellant under sections 30 and 33 the Arbitration Act, 1940 (1940 Act) in Misc. Case No. 183 of 1993.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant points out that in view of section 31(4) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, all applications are to be filed before the same Court where one of the applications was initially filed. According to him, an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was filed before this Court on the basis whereof proceeding was proceeded and the award was passed. Therefore, in the suit, being Title Suit No. 1975 of 1992, seeking decree on the award, the appellant had filed an objection under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, taking a specific ground. The respondent had attempted to get the matter transferred to this Court by invoking Clause 13 of the Letters Patent which was dismissed by order dated 8th August, 1994 by this Court in Matter No. 2303 of 1993 on the very ground on which objection was taken. It is contended that on earlier occasion, similar effort by the respondent was denied by this Court. The application under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the respondent before the City Civil Court at Calcutta was also rejected. Therefore, the right having been accrued to the appellant, the same cannot be taken away by allowing an order for return of the plaint. He then contends that while returning the plaint, it cannot return the objection under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. According to him, the present case comes within the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) since it is being decided on the basis of the objection taken by the appellant. It does not come within the purview of Order 7 Rule 10 CPC.
(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, it appears that the arbitration agreement was filed before this Court in Special Suit No. 136 of 1988, as is apparent from order dated 19th of June, 1989 at page 34 of the Paper Book. Section 31 of the 1940 Act prescribes in sub-section 4 that where in any reference, any application under the 1940 Act has been made in a Court competent to entertain the same, it is that Court alone which shall have jurisdiction over the arbitration proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that reference and that arbitration proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court.;