3v \ \m A- SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE DHIRENDRA MSHRA Mbitratian Awlicatian N0. 29f 2607 M! S Paul B1 others a Registexed pd; u16'1 mup fix 11L, a! hcal uluula I VPohce Statwn Kamtee Road P O Nagpur. . . Aypliean‘t Versus M] s South Eastern Coamfjlds Ltd. {Premously known as Wt‘stern CoalfiddS Ltd} a Subs1d1arv Coal h1d1a Ltd through Ito C M D hawng 1ts reglstei 6d Office at R11a€apur P 0 Fmaqpm M P . . Non—apyEicant Present:- Shn' ST Madnani with Shri MK, Sinha, counsol for the apphpcu 1t D1 N h Shukla Sr Advocate w1th hu Rltu M1shla counsel for the non—apphcant ORAL ORDER (“h “phi 20v8) Heard. The applicant liletl a petition before the earned District Judge, Bilaspur under Section 5, 11; 12 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 read With Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; 1996 with a prayer that arbitrator may be appointed to reeolve the dispute arising out of arbitration agreement between the parties and the dispute may be referred to the arbitrator so appointed for adj udioation. During pendency of the above petition, one application was filed by the applicant for amendment on 2.2.200? in the petition and prayed for deleting the reference to Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity ‘the Act of 1996’) from the petition as aleo the entire paragraphe No. 5: 12 and for deleting the words “Under the new Act” from paragraph No. 10. The parties; were heard on this; apphcation at‘iilength and the ‘learned District Judge by the order datedl‘“20.6.»2007 tgijrhput l d€ciding the above application, relying upon the judgnmnt in the matfer of Mis SBP as. Co. Vs. Mls Patel Enmeezring Ltd. reported 1‘11 AIR 2906 SC 450, referred‘this matter t0 this; Court for further hearing with an observation that “the application for amendment cannot be decided by this Court as the application for appointment of arbitrator has been filed on 19.8.2G04 i.e. after coming into force of the new Act and in View of the judgment in the matter of Patel Engineering the High Court has jurisdiction to hear such applications only, therefore, the matter be sent to the High Court”. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from perusal of the application ’dled before the learned District Judge, Korba it would be evident that the dispute related to an agreement entered into between the parties in the year 1981—82. On the applicatiOn of the applicant under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, an arbitrator Was appointed by the competent authority as per directions of the District Judge, Bilaspur and the parties participated in the arbitration“ proceedings. Thereafter, the application before the District Judge, Korba was filed in the year 2004 for appoinnnent of another arbitrator as the arbitrator, who was appointed earlier, did not pass award. The application for amendment was tiled by the applicant to correct the inadvertent errors present in the petition regarding provisions under which the petition was filed. However, instead of deciding the application for amendment the matter has been referred to this Court for further hearing. It was argued that it is settled law that where the reference to arbitrator was duly made prior to coming into force of the Act of 1996, such matters would be governed by the arbitral proceedings under the Arbitration Act, 1940 and provisions of the Act of 1996 would not be applicable. Reliance is placed on the decision in the matter of Neerai Miinjal and others Vs. Atul Graves: mnm and another reported in AIR 20G5 SC 2867'. Tn these circumstances, the matter may be sent back to the concerned‘*Dist«rict Judge to , .i is “o’ww‘w r decida the application dated 2.2.2067 for alnendrhent in the petitiori, after hearing counsel for the parties. Dr. ELK. Shrukla, learned Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the non-applicant does not dispute the legal proposition that the arbitral proceedings commenced between the partiesrprior to coming into force of the Act of 1996, Would be governed by the Arbitration Act, 1940. In this View of the matter, the office is directed to send back the file of the instant case to the learned District Judge, Korba, Who, in turn, shall pass appropriate order on the application of the applicant dated 2.2.2007 for amendment in‘the petition, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties to the dispute, in accordance with law. / y The reference is accordingly dispoSed ef a