Proper forum for filing award in Court.

Lakshmanan, J.

This petition is filed under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act to direct the arbitrator to file the original award dated 27.4.1988 into the court alongwith the entire papers and documents and to pass a decree in terms of the award for Rs. 2, 83, 177/- together with interest at 18% per annum from the date of award till payment and for costs.

x x x x x

2. I proceed to deal with only on the question of law in regard to maintainability of this petition in this court.

3. I have heard the arguments of Mr. C. Krishnan, learned counsel for the Union India, and Mr. T. R. Mani, learned Senior Advocate, on behalf of second respondent. According to the learned counsel for the second respondent, the original petition filed by the petitioner on the Original Side of this court is not maintainable and this court cannot receive the award since according to the learned counsel, the arbitration reference relates to the matter not fall within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. In support of his contention Mr. T. R. Mani, learned Senior Advocate, has invited my attention to the following three decisions. The leading judgment on this point is reported in 1950 (1) MLJ 709. A Division Bench of our High Court held as follows :

x x x x x

4. The above is the leading case on the subject relating to the proper forum and test of jurisdiction under Section 31(1) read with Section 2(c) of the Arbitration Act, for petitions filed under Section 14(2) of the said Act for receiving the award and passing a decree in terms of the award. It has been held by a Bench of this court that the place of execution of the agreement or the residence of the parties or the Arbitrators has no relevance and the court which would have jurisdiction in respect of the questions forming the subject-matter of the reference alone would have jurisdiction. Here, the dispute relates a contract work to be executed at Avadi which is outside the jurisdiction of the Original Side of the High Court and falls within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Court at Poonamallee and in my opinion the Original Side has therefore no jurisdiction to receive the award or pass a decree in terms of thereof.

5. The same view is reiterated in a decision reported in 1959 AIR(Punjab) 614.

x x x x x

6. The decision reported in 1966 AIR(SC) 134 goes a step further and held that an award can be filed only in the court in which the suit would lie with regard to the subject-matter of reference, and an agreement between the parties to file the Award in a different court cannot be given effect to, as such an agreement is against the statute and that the fact that the parties had acted upon such an agreement can be of no avail since there can be no estoppel against statute. The above Madras ruling is relied upon.

7. Section 31 of the Arbitration Act deals with the jurisdiction of the courts. Section 31(1) of said Act provides that an award may be filed in any court having jurisdiction in the matter to which the reference relates. Section 31(3) of the said Act, indicates that all applications regarding the conduct of arbitration proceedings or otherwise arising out of such proceedings shall be made to the court where the award has been or may be filed, and to no other court. On a reading Section 31(1) and Section 2(c) the Arbitration Act, it is clear that in order to decide which is the court which has jurisdiction in the matter to which a reference relates, what has to be ascertained is the court within which the suit could have been instituted for the claim which was raised in the reference. From the facts of this case, it is clear that no part of the case of action arose in Madras. The agreement related to the construction of technical accommodation for Vehicles Depot and Vehicles Depot Workshop at Avadi. The agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the second respondent. The works are to be executed at Avadi, within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Court, Poonamallee. The dispute with r