Writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs.

i) Issue appropriate writ in the form of Certiorari and quash Ext.P2

ii) Issue such other appropriate writ order or direction that this honorable court deems fit to grant in the course of the proceedings.

2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P 247 of 2008. The above execution petition was filed to execute an award passed in arbitration by the Mumbai Textile Merchants Mahajan in an arbitration case No.20/2005-2006 at Mumbai. The award was transferred for execution to the District Court, Trichur from High Court of Mumbai. The learned District Judge, Trichur receiving such transfer made over the award to the Principal Sub Court, Irinjalakuda within the jurisdiction of which the defendant carried his business.

The judgment debtor receiving notice of the proceedings from that court appeared and filed objections contending that the execution of the award can be proceeded only by the District Court and not by an inferior court. The learned Sub Judge negatived the objections holding that court is fully competent to execute the award. Ext.P2 is the copy of that order. Propriety and correctness of ext.P2 order is impeached in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the definition of court under section 2(1) (e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, hereinafter referred to as the Act. It is imperative that only a District Court has jurisdiction to enforce an award passed in an arbitration under the Act. The learned counsel relied on 'Mahesh.B.Shah v Joseph' (2005(3) KLT 787) to contend that the enforceability of an award as covered by Section 36 of the Act should be read along with Section 2(1)(e) of the Act defining a 'court', and when that be so, an award has necessarily to be executed by the District Court and not by an inferior court. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent inviting my attention to 'Muralimohan C.K. v M/S Asok Corporation and Another' (2008(3) KHC 419) submitted that an award can be enforced as if it were a decree of the Civil Court, as stated in Section 36 of the Act and as such an inferior court below the District Court is also empowered and competent to enforce such an award once it was made over by the District Court.

4. The question posed for consideration relate to the execution of the award passed under the Act by a civil court. In the decision referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner 'Mahesh .B. Shah v Joseph' (2005 (3) KLT 787) the award was directly presented by the Munsiff Court for execution and that was not a case where the award was made over by the District Court for execution. That distinction cannot be lost sight of. In the other decision referred to by the learned counsel for the respondent 'Muralimohan C.K. v M/S Asok Corporation and Another' (2008 (3) KHC 419) the competency of an Additional District Judge to enforce an award under Section 36 of the above Act was considered and in that context it was held that Additional District Judge is also fully empowered to execute the award. Section 2 (1) (e) of the above Act defines a "Court" as the principal civil court of original jurisdiction in the District 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 inferior to such principal Civil Court, or any court of Small Causes. Opening words of Section 2 of the Act mandates 'unless the context otherwise requires' so far as the reference of any term defined under that Section with respect to part I of the Act, the same meaning as defined has to be given effect to. Section 36 of the Act dealing with enforceability of the award falls under part I of the Act and, when that be so, the w