Case Note & Summary
The present petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar in Commercial Execution Petition No.125 of 2023. The petitioners, legal heirs of deceased Prataprai Gaurishankar Trivedi and others, sought execution of an arbitration award under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The learned Judge rejected the petition, holding that it had no jurisdiction to entertain applications arising out of the Arbitration Act, 1996, relying on Section 10(2)(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and a notification dated 26.10.2020 of the Legal Department of the State. The High Court, on 09.03.2026, summoned a report from the District Judge, Jamnagar to explain the basis of the rejection. The report revealed that the notification dated 26.10.2020, while conferring commercial court jurisdiction on Senior Civil Judges, expressly excluded applications under the Arbitration Act, 1996, and instead conferred such jurisdiction on the Additional District Judge for the District and Taluka concerned. The High Court also noted a reference to its earlier decision dated 22.01.2019 in Special Civil Application No.4138 of 2018, which held similarly. Consequently, the High Court found no error in the impugned order and dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Commercial Courts - Execution of Arbitration Award - Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and Notification dated 26.10.2020 - The Principal Senior Civil Judge rejected the execution petition holding that it had no jurisdiction to try applications under the Arbitration Act, 1996. The High Court, upon summoning a report from the District Judge, found that the notification dated 26.10.2020 expressly excludes applications under the Arbitration Act from the jurisdiction of Senior Civil Judges and confers such jurisdiction on the Additional District Judge for the District and Taluka concerned. Held that the impugned order was correct and the petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar had jurisdiction to entertain a Commercial Execution Petition arising out of an arbitration award under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the order of the Principal Senior Civil Judge that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the execution petition under the Arbitration Act, 1996.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Commercial Courts
- Arbitration Act 1996 Section 36
- Commercial Courts Act 2015 Section 10
- Notification dated 26.10.2020
- Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (03) 1142
R/Special Civil Application No. 3114 of 2026
Mr. Vimal M. Patel and Mr. Hitesh V. Patel for VMP Legal(7210) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,1.1,1.10,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8,1.9,2,3
Legal Heirs of Deceased Prataprai Gaurishankar Trivedi & Ors.
Deceased Niranjanbhai Gaurishankar Trivedi & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition under Article 227 challenging an order rejecting a commercial execution petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to set aside the order dated 26.11.2025 and to direct the Principal Senior Civil Judge to entertain the execution petition.
Filing Reason
The execution petition filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 was rejected by the Principal Senior Civil Judge on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
Previous Decisions
The Principal Senior Civil Judge passed the impugned order on 26.11.2025 in Commercial Execution Petition No.125 of 2023.
Issues
Whether the Principal Senior Civil Judge had jurisdiction to entertain an execution petition arising out of an arbitration award under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the Principal Senior Civil Judge had jurisdiction as a Commercial Court under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
The respondents (through the report of the District Judge) contended that the notification dated 26.10.2020 excluded arbitration applications from the jurisdiction of Senior Civil Judges and conferred such jurisdiction on the Additional District Judge.
Ratio Decidendi
Under the notification dated 26.10.2020 of the Legal Department of the State, applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are excluded from the jurisdiction of Senior Civil Judges acting as Commercial Courts, and such jurisdiction is conferred on the Additional District Judge for the District and Taluka concerned.
Judgment Excerpts
By means of the present petition filed invoking the extraordinary supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar in Commercial Execution Petition No.125 of 2023.
A perusal of the report of the learned Principal District Judge, Jamnagar indicates that vide notification dated 26.10.2020 of the Legal Department of the State, while conferring the jurisdiction of Commercial Courts upon the Senior Civil Judge ... exceptions have been made to the applications preferred under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act’ 1996. The jurisdiction to decide the applications under Arbitration Act’ 1996, however, is conferred upon the Commercial Courts to the Additional District Judge for the District and Taluka concerned.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Commercial Execution Petition No.125 of 2023 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar, which was rejected on 26.11.2025 for lack of jurisdiction. The petitioners then filed Special Civil Application No.3114 of 2026 under Article 227 before the High Court of Gujarat. On 09.03.2026, the High Court summoned a report from the District Judge, Jamnagar. After considering the report, the High Court dismissed the petition on 17.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 10(2)(1)(e), Section 36
- Commercial Courts Act, 2015: Section 10
- Constitution of India: Article 227
