Arbitration No.239 of 2006 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Arbitration No.239 of 2006 Decided on : 23-01-2009 Union of India ....Petitioner VERSUS Sanjeev Construction Company ....Respondent CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? -.- Present:- Mr. Ashwinie Kumar Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J The present petition has been sent to this Court by the learned District Judge, Jalandhar in view of notification No.197-Rules/XVI.A.129 dated 13.7.2006. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner filed a petition under Section 8, 9 and 11 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 before Civil Judge,(Sr. Division) Jalandhar on 7.8.2004, but was retuned to the petitioner for presentation under Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being presented before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar as the Court of Civil Judge, (Sr. Division) Jalandhar has no jurisdiction to try the same. The said application was filed after the dispute between the Arbitration No.239 of 2006 -2- parties. The dispute between the parties was referred to arbitration of Shri V.B. Abhyankar, Chief Engineer, Jabalpur Cantt (Madhya Pardesh). An Award dated 23.02.1987 was announced. The respondent moved an application for making the said Award as Rule of the Court. The learned Trial court vide order dated 15.01.1996, in respect of claims No.1 to 9, 11,14 to 26 of the contractor and claims No.2 to 4 of the petitioner, has made the said Award as Rule of the Court, but remitted the claims No.10,12 and 13 of the contractor and claim No.1 of the petitioner to the Arbitrator, for reconsideration/re-evaluation. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of the claim remitted to the Arbitrator, in pursuance of the decision of the Civil Court and that such appointment of the Arbitrator, is under the Arbitration Act, 1940 and not, in terms of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. From the perusal of the order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Jalandhar on 15.1.1996, it is apparent that the proceedings for appointment of an Arbitrator are governed by the Arbitration Act, 1940 as such disputes were referred to an Arbitrator prior to the commencement of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The fact that the applicant has filed the petition as the one under Section 8, 9 and 11 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 is not determinative of the jurisdiction of the Court as the facts are apparent that the reference to an Arbitrator was made prior to the commencement of the Act. Therefore, the matter is remitted back to the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalandhar to adjudicate upon the present application in accordance with law. Arbitration No.239 of 2006 -3- The learned Trial Court shall take expeditious decision preferably within a period of 6 months. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court on 02.03.2009. (Hemant Gupta) Judge 23rd January, 2009. monika