KINETIC CAPITAL FINANCE LTD Vs. ANIL KIMAR MISRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order dated 26.9.1998 passed by the Civil Judge, Delhi in Execution Petition No. 6/1998 holding that the Court of Civil Judge has no jurisdiction to entertain the execution application filed by the petitioner.

(2.) Disputes having arisen between the petitioner and the respondent the same were referred to the Arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement. The Arbitrator entered into the reference, made and published his award on 21.8.1997 awarding a sum of Rs. 19,988/- payable by the respondent to the petitioner company. After expiry of the period for filing objections an execution petition was filed by the petitioner in the Court of Senior Civil Judge seeking transfer certificate to the District Judge, Kanpur. The Senior Civil Judge assigned the aforesaid execution petition to the Court of the Civil Judge, Delhi. The Civil Judge, Delhi however, by the impugned order directed for return of the execution application for presenting the same to the appropriate Court holding that his Court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the said application as according to him the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in the district is the District Court only. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the present petition is filed in this Court challenging the order of the Civil Judge. During the course of arguments, I requested Mr. Raman Kapoor, Advocate, who was present in Court to assist the Court in respect of the subject-matter of the present petition. I wish to place on record a word of appreciation for the able assistance provided by him in answering the issue involved in the present case.

(3.) Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Kapoor submitted that the definition of Court as given in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act includes the Court of Civil Judge also when the subject-matter of the proceedings does not exceed Rs. 1 lac. In support of his contention Mr. Kapoor relied upon the Scheme made by the High Court of Delhi under Notification dated 20.2.1994. The High Court in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (10) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act has issued a notification circulating the Scheme framed by the Chief Justice of the High Court which is called the Scheme for appointment of Arbitrators. In the said Scheme under the head "Submission of request" it is provided that the request under Sub-section (4) or Sub-section (5) or Sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Act shall be made in writing in the form prescribed in Appendix-I. Under paragraph 3 of the said Scheme the High Court has named the Authorities who could deal with the request for appointment of Arbitrators. Paragraph 3(i) of the said Scheme provides that for the purpose of dealing with the request made in para 2 of the Scheme the Chief Justice has designated the Civil Judge where the value of the subject-matter does not exceed Rs. 1 lakh, the District Judge/Additional District Judge where the value of the subject- matter does not exceed Rs. 5 lakhs and the Judge of the High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction, where the value of the subject-matter exceeds Rs. 5 lakh. It is provided in paragraph 3(ii) of the Scheme that the requests falling under Sub-para (a) of para 3, i.e. the Civil Judge where the value of the subject-matter does not exceed Rs. 1 lac, be initially placed before the Senior Civil Judge for appropriate allotment. It is thus apparent that in terms of the provisions of Section 11 so far appointment of an Arbitrator is concerned a request could be made by a person for appointment of an Arbitrator to the Civil Judge when the valuation of the subject- matter does not exceed Rs. 1 lac, since he has been designated by the Chief Justice under the aforesaid Scheme.