[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR J U D G M E N T S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 1437/2007 M/s RAJPUTANA HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PRADEEP KUMAR SHRIYA DATE: 02.01.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr. G.S. Bapna for the appellant. Mr. L.L. Gupta for the respondent. **** By an application the respondent submits that the order impugned dated 25.01.2007 has been made by the Additional District Judge No.1, Jaipur City, Jaipur remitting the award to the arbitrator in exercise of provisions of Section 16 of the Arbitration Act, and, therefore, no appeal lies against such an order of remitting the award to the arbitrator under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act. Learned counsel has relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Chandra Trading Co. Vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2002) 10 SCC 506, wherein the Apex Court has held that under the Arbitration Act, 1940 each of the modes in which a proceeding is disposed of by the Court is dealt with in [2] clauses (i) to (iv) of Section 39(1) but not an order remitting the matter to the arbitrator under Section 16 of the Act, the principle being that such a decision would mean referring the matter back to the arbitrator or it is a case for reconsideration of the matter and no appeal lies in such cases under Section 39 of the Act. In the instant case, the Additional District Judge No.1, Jaipur City, Jaipur remitted the matter to the arbitrator under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act and, therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Chandra Trading Co. Vs. State of U.P. And Another (supra), no appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 lies. The application is, therefore, allowed and the present appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act filed against the order impugned remitting the award to the arbitrator is dismissed as not maintainable. (H.R. PANWAR),J. /KKC/