ORDER

S.B. SINHA, J :

1. Which would be the appropriate court for the purpose of filing of an award by the arbitrator is the question involved herein.

2. The said question arises in the following circumstances: Respondent herein admittedly was a contractor of the appellant. Disputes and differences having arisen between the parties, the arbitration agreement was invoked. An arbitrator was appointed. The parties hereto raised their claims and counter-claims before the arbitrator. He made an award of Rs.18,97,729.37 in favour of the respondent.

3. A question of law was raised when the matter ultimately came up before the court arising out of the proceedings for making the said award a rule of the court, and this Court in its judgment dated 29.08.2003 [since reported in (2003) 8 SCC 154], while setting aside the award, directed: "40. However, as noticed hereinbefore, this case stands on a different footing, namely, that the arbitrator while passing the award in relation to some items failed and/or neglected to take into consideration the relevant clauses of the contract, nor did he take into consideration the relevant materials for the purpose of arriving at a correct fact. Such an order would amount to misdirection in law.

41. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the matter requires reconsideration. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and particularly keeping in view the fact that the matter relates to pure interpretation of document which gives rise to question of law and in stead and in place of remitting the matter to the named arbitrator, we would direct that the disputes in relation to Claim Items 3, 7 and 11 be referred to the Hon'ble Mr Justice D.N. Prasad, a retired Judge of the Jharkhand High Court on such terms and conditions as may be mutually agreed upon by the parties. The learned arbitrator is requested to consider the desirability of making his award as expeditiously as possible keeping in view the fact that the matter has been pending for a long time."

4. Before the learned arbitrator, three claims were raised by the respondent, viz., Claim Item Nos. 3, 7 and 11. Claim Item No. 3 related to extra items which has been rejected. Claim Item No. 7 related to loss of profit. Respondent raised a claim of Rs. 27,77,714/-; an award of Rs. 12,20,289/- was made. So far as Claim Item No. 11 is concerned, which related to the escalation of materials, an award of Rs. 90,005/- was made. It appears that before the arbitrator parties agreed that the award be filed before this Court. However, an objection has been filed by the appellant wherein inter alia the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the objection filed under the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short "the 1940 Act") has been questioned.

5. Indisputably, the 1940 Act will apply in this case.

6. Section 2(c) of the 1940 Act read as under:

2. In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, - *** *** *** ''Court'' means a Civil Court having jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the subject-matter of the reference if the same had been the subject- matter of a suit, but does not except for the purpose of arbitration proceedings under Section 21 include a Small Cause Court;

7. Although strictly, it is not necessary but we may also notice the change in the definition of the term "court" brought in by the Parliament in Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as contained in Section 2(1)(e) therein which reads as under:

2. (1) In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires, - *** *** ***

(e) "Court" means the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction in a district, and includes the High Court in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, having jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the subject-matter of the arbitr