The Court within which the suit could have been instituted for the subject matter of the reference would have jurisdiction to receive the award and pass a decree.

This petition is filed under Sec.l4(2) of the Arbitration Act to direct the arbitrator file the original award dated 27.4.1988 into the Court along with the entire papers documents and to pass a decree in terms of the award for Rs.2,83,117 together with at 18% per annum from the date of award till payment and for costs.

2. The petitioner and the second respondent were parties to the agreement No.CESA/AVADI/17 of 72-73 dated 28.9.1972. The first respondent was appointed Arbitrator under the relevant arbitration clause of the said agreement. This contract to the construction of technical accommodation for Vehicles Depot and Vehicles Workshop at Avadi. As per the agreement the works are to be executed at Avadi, within jurisdiction of the Sub Court, Poonamallee. The dispute related to this construction Avadi. After enquiry the arbitrator passed an award on 27.4.1988 for Rs.2,83,117. The was received by both parties from the arbitrator. In paragraph 7 of the petition the petitioner has stated as under: "The petitioner as well as the second respondent have permanent address in Madras Hence, this Court has jurisdiction for passing the decree in terms of the award passed 1st respondent." The filing of the award in this Court was questioned by the second respondent. They their counter that the claim of the petitioner is not maintainable on facts as well as The petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for. The petition filed in this Court maintainable. The arbitration reference relates to a matter not falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Original Side of this Court. The petition is therefore not maintainable. prayed that this Court be pleased to dismiss the petition with the costs of second respondent both as not maintainable and as without jurisdiction.

3. The second respondent has raised several other points and contentions in the statement. As I am disposing of the matter only on the question of law in regard maintainability and jurisdiction of this Court to entertain this O.P. I am not adverting other issues raised by the second respondent. Those points are left open to be decided the appropriate forum at the appropriate stage. Hence I proceed to deal with only question of law in regard to maintainability of this petition in this court.

4. I have heard the arguments of Mr.C.Krishnan, learned counsel for the Union of India, Mr.T.R.Mani, learned Senior Advocate, on behalf of second respondent. According learned counsel for the second respondent, the original petition filed by the petitioner Original Side of this Court is not maintainable and this Court cannot receive the award according to the learned counsel, the arbitration reference relates to the matter not 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:

Leading judgment on this point is reported in Venkatasamiappa v. Srinidhi Ltd., M.L.J. 709. A Division Bench of our High Court held as follows: "Held: The Court in Madras has no jurisdiction to receive the award and only the Bangalore has jurisdiction. In order to determine which is the Court having jurisdiction in the matter, you should all ascertain what the questions are, which form the subject-matter of the reference arbitration. You then proceed to ask; supposing these questions had arisen in a suit, the Court which would have jurisdiction to entertain the suit? That Court would be not the Court at the place in which the agreement was entered into or where the resides, but the Court which would have jurisdiction in respect of the questions forming subject-matter of the reference. The question of residence would become relevant only should it arise out of or in connection with the subject-matter of the dispute and the reference. Merely because the three arbitrators happen to be residents of Madras, one is not presume an intention to submit to the jurisdiction of the