Domestic awards from international commercial arbitration are enforceable exclusively in the High Court, not District Commercial Courts, confirming jurisdictional provisions under relevant acts.

JUDGMENT :

Rajan Roy, J.

1. Heard Shri Pritish Kumar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rajeev Sharan, Advocate, Shri Amal Rastogi Advocate, Shri Devesh Bahadur Singh, Advocate, Shri Utkarsh Srivastava, Advocate for appellants and Shri Pankaj Kumar Singh, Advocate along with Shri Anurag Tyagi, learned counsel for respondents.

2. Counsel for parties have argued the matter finally at the stage of admission itself, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal.

3. By means of this appeal filed under Chapter-VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred as 'Rules of the Court') judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of this Court functioning as Commercial Division under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred as the 'Act 2015') dated 09.10.2025 passed in Execution Case No.1 of 2025 has been challenged.

4. The Parties counsel are ad idem that against such an order no further remedy is prescribed either under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as the 'Act 1996') or the Act 2015, therefore, this Special Appeal has been filed.

5. We have gone through Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court which reads as under:-

"5. Special appeal.—An appeal shall lie to the Court from a judgment (not being a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction) in respect of a decree or order made by a Court subject to the superintendence of the Court and not being an order made in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction or in the exercise of its power of superintendence or in the exercise of criminal jurisdiction [or in the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 or Article 227 of the Constitution in respect of any judgment, order or award - (a) of a tribunal, Court or statutory arbitrator made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of jurisdiction under any Uttar Pradesh Act or under any Central Act, with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List or the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, or (b) of the Government or any officer or authority, made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of appellate or revisional jurisdiction under any such Act of one Judge."

6. An appeal under the said provision shall lie to the Court from a judgment of one Judge subject to the exclusionary clause contained therein. We have gone through the exclusionary clause and as the learned Single Judge in this case has passed the order impugned in exercise of his original jurisdiction under the Act 2015 read with the Act 1996 and not under an appellate or revisional or supervisory jurisdiction, nor under Article 226 or 227 of Constitution of India, therefore, the said exclusion clause not being applicable, this appeal is found to be maintainable.

7. At the very outset, it needs to be mentioned that the appellant herein does not dispute the fact that the award in question is not a foreign award, but is a domestic award albeit in an international commercial arbitration. The fact that the arbitration in question is also an international commercial arbitration is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the seat of arbitration was within India.

8. Now, the question before us is as to whether such an award is to be enforced through the Commercial Courts established at the district level or the Commercial Division of the High Court.

9. I