JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner along with Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate and Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate.

2. Heard Mr. Rajendra Raghuvanshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents along with Mr. Kaustav Panda, Advocate.

3. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

''This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 06.10.2016 passed in Execution Case No. 60/2014 by Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) No. 1, Ranchi filed herein wherein application/objection filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and Decree holder i.e. Respondent No. 1 herein has been directed to file writ for realization of the Decreetal amount, now pending in the court of Additional Judicial Commissioner, XIII-cum-Commercial Court, Ranchi and also for quashing of the order dated 16.05.2017 passed by Additional Judicial Commissioner-XIII-cum-Commercial Court, Ranchi in Execution Case No. 60/2014 filed by the respondent No. 1 whereby the time petition filed by the petitioner for adjourning the execution case no. 60/2014 till adjudication of the appeal filed by the petitioner against the Arbitration Award No. 07/2013, has been dismissed whereas both Arbitration Appeal U/s 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Execution Case No. 60/2014 are pending before one court i.e. Additional Judicial Commissioner-XII- cum-Commercial Court, Ranchi.''

Arguments of the petitioner

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the solitary point which is involved in this case is whether the impugned order dated 06.10.2016 passed in Execution Case No. 60/2014 arising out of Arbitral Award dated 16.04.2014 by the learned court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) No. 1, Ranchi is wholly without jurisdiction in view of the fact that the learned court below lost jurisdiction over the execution proceeding after constitution of commercial court at Ranchi under the provisions of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to the Act of 2015) for which necessary notification was also issued for transfer of such cases. He further submits that by the said order dated 16.10.2016, the objection to the execution proceedings was rejected and therefore the consequential order dated 16.05.2017 passed by Additional Judicial Commissioner-XIII-cum-Commercial Court, Ranchi in Execution Case No. 60/2014 whereby writ for delivery of possession was issued be also set-aside.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Execution Case No. 60 of 2014 was filed in the court of learned Subordinate Judge, I, Ranchi under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Order XXI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and vide impugned order dated 06.10.2016, the objection which was put forward by the judgment debtors was rejected and the decree holder was directed to file writ for realization of the decretal award and vide impugned order dated 16.05.2017, the office was directed to issue writ of delivery of possession in favour of the respondent no. 1. Learned counsel submits that as per Section 10 and 15 of the aforesaid Act of 2015 , the execution proceedings were to be transferred to the commercial court, since the amount involved in the case is more than One crore. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of constitution of a separate Commercial Court at Ranchi, the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) No. 1, Ranchi proceeded with the matter and passed the impugned order dated 16.10.2016. He submits that as of now the execution case is pending before the learned commercial court at Ranchi who has passed the consequential order dated 16.05.2017 which is also under challenge.

6. Under Section 15(2) of the Act of 2015 , all suits and applications including applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 relating to a commercial dispute of specified value pen