Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court at Goa, in a reference made by a learned Single Judge, addressed the question of which court has jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 29-A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for extension of time for making an arbitral award in domestic arbitrations. The reference arose because the learned Single Judge disagreed with an earlier view in Mormugao Port Trust vs. Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd., which had held that such applications lie before the High Court. The referring judge noted that this view was contrary to the decision in K.I.P.L. Vistacore Infra Projects J. V. Municipal Corporation of the city of Ichalkaranji. The Division Bench, after hearing the parties, considered the Supreme Court's decision in Chief Engineer (NH) PWD (Roads) vs. M/s. BSC & C and C JV, which was brought to its notice. The Supreme Court had clearly held that the power under Section 29-A(4) vests in the 'Court' as defined in Section 2(1)(e) of the Act, which is the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district, including the High Court only if it has ordinary original civil jurisdiction. Since the Bombay High Court at Goa does not have ordinary original civil jurisdiction, the appropriate forum is the Principal District Judge, South Goa, Margao. The Division Bench answered the reference accordingly, holding that applications under Section 29-A(4) lie before the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, and the power to substitute arbitrators under Section 29-A(6) is a consequential power exercisable only by that court. The decision in Marcelina Fernandes & Ors. vs. Green Valley Realtors, which followed the Supreme Court's view, was also noted.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Jurisdiction for Extension of Arbitral Mandate - Section 29-A(4) read with Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The power under Section 29-A(4) vests in the 'Court' as defined in Section 2(1)(e), which is the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district, including the High Court only if it has ordinary original civil jurisdiction. The High Court of Bombay at Goa does not have such jurisdiction, hence applications under Section 29-A(4) lie before the Principal District Judge. (Paras 3-4) B) Arbitration Law - Consequential Power to Substitute Arbitrator - Section 29-A(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The power to substitute arbitrators under Section 29-A(6) is a consequential power that can be exercised only by the Court which is empowered to extend time under Section 29-A(4). It is not an independent power. (Para 3) C) Arbitration Law - Effect of Supreme Court Decision - Chief Engineer (NH) PWD (Roads) vs. M/s. BSC & C and C JV, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1801 - The Supreme Court's decision squarely covers the issue, holding that the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction is the appropriate forum for Section 29-A(4) applications. The reference is answered accordingly. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an application under Section 29-A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for extension of time for making an arbitral award lies before the High Court or the Civil Court having original jurisdiction in domestic arbitration, particularly when the arbitral tribunal was constituted by the High Court under Section 11(6) or by consent under Section 11(2).
Final Decision
The reference is answered in terms of the Supreme Court's decision in Chief Engineer (NH) PWD (Roads) vs. M/s. BSC & C and C JV. Applications under Section 29-A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 lie before the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in the district, which in this case is the Court of Principal District Judge, South Goa, Margao. The High Court does not have jurisdiction as it lacks ordinary original civil jurisdiction.
Law Points
- Section 29-A(4) application lies before the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in the district
- including the High Court only if it has ordinary original civil jurisdiction
- Section 2(1)(e) definition of 'Court' governs Section 29-A
- Power to substitute arbitrator under Section 29-A(6) is consequential to extension power
