( 1 ) THE revision petitioner assails the order dated 30-10-2002 passed by the learned senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda, in e. P. No. 60 of 2002.

( 2 ) THE revision petitioner sought to file the said Execution Petition before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda, as against the respondents herein who are the judgment-Debtors. The factual matrix reveals that the petitioner and the respondents by means of an arbitral agreement referred the matter to the arbitrators for resolution of the dispute, who eventually passed an award. It appears that having been felt aggrieved, the first respondent herein filed an application to set aside the award, which is now pending adjudication before the District Court at nalgonda. In the meanwhile, the decreeholder as stated hereinabove sought to execute the award as if it were a decree of the Civil Court by filing E. P. No. 60 of 2002 under Section 36 of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 ( the Act for brevity) before the Senior Civil Judge at miryalaguda. Under the impugned order, the learned Judge returned the Execution petition for being presented before an appropriate Court on the premise that, that court has n