Koshy, J.

The appellant, a private limited company having its registered office at Alleppey entered into an agreement with the respondent. In the agreement there is a clause for arbitration. Clause XVII of the agreement reads as follows:

“XVII Arbitration And Jurisdiction

a. If any dispute or difference arises between the Parties hereto as to the construction, interpretation, effect and implication of any provision of this Agreement including the rights or liabilities or any claim or demand of any Party against other or in regard to any matter under these presents but excluding any matters, decisions of determination of which is expressly provided for in this Agreement, such disputes or differences shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the Secretary of the Department of Science & Technology, Government of India, or that of his nominee and his decision will be final and shall be binding on all the parties. A reference to the arbitration under this clause shall be deemed to be submission within the meaning of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the rules framed thereunder for the time being in force.

b. If the “COMPANY” does not make any claim or demand or raise any dispute or difference in terms of Sub Clause “a” of this Clause within six months from the date on which such claim or demand arises, the “COMPANY” shall deem to have waived and abandoned such claim or demand or the right to raise such dispute or difference against “TIFAC.”

c. The venue of the Arbitration shall be at Delhi.”

Based on the above agreement some claims were raised against the appellant-Company by the respondent-Society. Finally, arbitral award was passed (Annexure B) for a sum of Rs.1,20,61,000/- with interest. A petition was filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for setting aside the arbitral award. The District Court, Alleppey, came to the conclusion that no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of the Alleppey Court and the venue of arbitration is fixed at Delhi. Finding that the Alleppey Court has no jurisdiction the application was dismissed. Prima facie the procedure adopted by the Alleppey Court is not correct because even if there is no jurisdiction it should have returned the petition for filing in the proper court instead of dismissing the same.

2. The main contention raised in the appeal is that the Alleppey Court has got jurisdiction in view of Section 20 (a) of the Civil Procedure Code as well as the definition of court under Section 2(e) of the Act. Now we will refer to the definition of ‘court’ under Section 2(e) which is as follows:

“2(a). “Court” means 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 arbitration if the same had been the subject-matter of a suit, but does not include any civil Court of a grade inferior to such principal civil Court, or any Court of Small Causes’”

Here, the arbitral claim was filed by the claimant against the appellant company having its registered office at Alleppey. If there was no arbitral clause, the only remedy available to the respondent was to file a suit and then in view of Section 20(a) of the C.P.C. a suit could have been filed in Alleppey Court also. Section 20(a) of the CPC reads as follows:

“20. Other suits to be instituted where defendants resides or cause of action arises.- Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction–

(a) the defendant, or each of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain;”

Since the registered office is situated at Alleppey the claimant can file the suit in Alleppey. Hence, the Alleppey Court has