JUDGMENT :

Prasenjit Biswas, J.

1. As per earlier direction dated 25.11.2022 passed by this court affidavit of service was affected upon the Respondent, despite it has not ventured to appear before this court at the time of hearing.

2. Let the affidavit of service be kept with the record.

3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant was present.

4. The instant appeal is preferred by the appellant challenging the impugned order dated 06.07.2022 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge 1st Court, Howrah passed in connection with Other Suit No.22 of 2008.

5. Whereby and where under Arbitral Award dated 16.04.2008 passed by the Arbitrator in connection with Memo No.2857-R/Adt. Dt.29.11.2000 is set aside by the Court below.

6. Mr. Utpal Bose, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant assailed before us inter alia that the court below has acted illegally and with material irregularity in passing the impugned order and also failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him by law while passing the said judgment.

7. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the dispute between the parties is a commercial dispute within the meaning of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the court below did not have jurisdiction to try, determine and hear the case inasmuch as the same involved commercial dispute within the meaning of Section 2 (1) of the Act.

8. Ld. Counsel at the time of hearing drew our attention about the Notification No.197-J.-the 28th June, 2016 of Government of West Bengal, Judicial Department, Writers’ Building, Kolkata-700001 which reflects about the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Rajarhat, the areas included within the districts of North 24 Parganas, Nadia, Hooghly and Howrah.

9. As per submission made by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant that the impugned order is without jurisdiction, bad in law and may be set aside. According to the Ld. Counsel the present suit is a suit which is to be treated as a commercial suit to be tried by the Commercial Court and the subject matter of the commercial dispute involved in the suit comes within the purview of the definition of commercial dispute as in Section 2 (1) (c) of the Act.

10. We have anxiously considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel. Perused the impugned order and other materials available on record.

11. To resolve the issue arising for consideration, it is essential to understand the objective of the enactment with reference to the relevant provisions. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 was enacted with the objective of providing an independent mechanism for early resolution of high-value commercial disputes involving complex facts and questions of law.

12. The Act of 2015 defines a commercial dispute which is required to be tried by a Commercial Court in the case it is within the jurisdiction of District Court and by a Commercial Division if it is within the jurisdiction of a High Court. The definition of 'commercial disputes' appears in Section 2 (1) of the said Act.

13. It appears that the impugned judgment was passed on 06.07.2022 by the Court below after commencement of Notification No.197-J.-the 28th June, 2016 which has included the district Howrah under the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Rajarhat.

14. Section 15 of the Act, 2015 provides as under: ?

15. Section 15: - Transfer of pending cases. —

(1) All suits and applications, including applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), relating to a commercial dispute of a Specified Value pending in a High Court where a Commercial Division has been constituted, shall be transferred to the Commercial Division.

(2) All suits and applications, including applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), relating to a commercial dispute of a Specified Value pending in any civil court in any district or area in respect of which a Commercial Court has been constituted, shall be transferred to such Comm