Disposed

M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation p Limited v. M/s Process Equipments India and Another

Uttarakhand HC17 Jul 2017C24/29/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed a request by the District Judge, Dehradun, to transfer an arbitration case he could not adjudicate. The court interpreted 'Court' under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that a request for transfer to any Additional District Judge within the same judgeship is valid.

What did the court decide?

The request for transfer to another District Judge was disposed of with direction to transfer to an Additional District Judge.

M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation p Limited Vs M/s Process… — Arbitration | Uttarakhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Civil Transfer Application No. 29/2017 In the matter of

¶3

M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation (P) Limited

¶4

Versus

¶5

Process Equipments India & Another

¶6

July 1 7 th , 2017

¶7

Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.

¶8

Considered the letter dated 25.5.2017 of Shri N.S. Dhanik, District Judge, Dehradun, wherein he has requested that due to some unavoidable reason, he does not want to proceed with the Arbitration Case No. 166/2016 between M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation (P) Limited v. M/s Process Equipments India & Another. He has further written that the matter of such nature could only be heard by the Court of District Judge. Hence, it should be transferred to the Court of some other District Judge, who is naturally available in other districts.

¶9

I think the situation, which was prevailing earlier, has changed now by way of Amendment Act No. 3 of 2016 w.e.f. 23.10.2015, whereby the definition of “Court”, as envisaged under Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has been elaborated again. It contemplates as under:

¶10

“(e) “Court” means— (i) in the case of an arbitration other than international commercial arbitration, the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district, and includes the High Court in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, having jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the subject-matter of

¶11

¶12

the arbitration if the same had been the subject-matter of a suit, but does not include any Civil Court of a grade inferior to such principal Civil Court, or any Court of Small Causes;

¶13

This position has further been made clear by the Full Bench of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation v. M/s Impression , reported in AIR 2016 Calcutta 236 . The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has defined the word “Court”, as postulated under Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and the same is reproduced as under:

¶14

The word 'Court' within the meaning of Section 2(1)(e) means a court which is competent under law to decide the question forming the subject-matter of arbitration. Admittedly, no appeal is provided against the judgment of Additional District to the Principal District Judge of the District. When we read the provisions of the Civil Courts Act, it becomes clear that there is no distinction between the Principal civil court of original jurisdiction, i.e., the Principal District Judge, and Additional District Judge. Both the Principal civil court of original jurisdiction as well as the Additional District Judge have the jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose of all suits and all such proceedings of civil nature which come under their jurisdiction. By virtue of the provisions of

¶15

¶16

Civil Courts Act, the Principal civil court of original jurisdiction can distribute and allot cases filed before him to Additional District Judges in the District which is purely an administrative matter. That does not mean that the Additional District Judges would become a grade inferior to the Principal civil court of original jurisdiction.”

¶17

Hence, the request/letter of the District Judge, Dehradun is disposed of with the observation that if he does not want to adjudicate the said arbitration matter, he may transfer the same to the Court of any Additional District Judge within his Judgeship.

¶18

Registry shall send a copy of this order to the District Judge, Dehradun for further necessary action and compliance.

¶19

(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶20

Prabodh

M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation p Limited v. M/s Process Equipments India and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Gunsola Hydro Power Generation p Limited v. M/s Process Equipments India and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.s. Rawat and Another Vs K.h.das

Shankar Dutt Joshi and Another Vs Tej Ram Sagar and Others

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Vimla Bhatt and Others

Smt Laxmi Devi and Others Vs Vipin Kumar Dandriyal and Others

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt Laxmi Devi and Others

Mrs Shiv Kumari Bansal Vs Sandeep Kumar