IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3114 of 2026 =============================================

LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED PRATAPRAI GAURISHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS.

Versus DECEASED NIRANJANBHAI GAURISHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR.VIMAL M. PATEL AND MR.HITESH V. PATEL FOR VMP LEGAL(7210) for the Petitioner(s) No.

1,1.1,1.10,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8,1.9,2,3 =============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 17/03/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. By means of the present petition filed invoking the extraordinary supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar in Commercial Execution Petition No.125 of 2023.

2. By the order impugned, the Principal Senior Civil Judge, referring to the provisions of Section 10(2)(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act’ 1996 (for short, “the Arbitration Act’ 1996”) as well as the provisions of Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act’ 2015 and the notification dated 26.10.2020 of the Legal Department of the State, has held that it has no jurisdiction to try with the application arising out of the Arbitration Act’ 1996.

3. On the presentation of the present petition, vide order dated 09.03.2026, we have summoned the report of the District Judge, Jamnagar to explain as to how and in what manner the execution petition arising out of the arbitration award filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act’ 1996 has been rejected by the judge concerned.

4. A perusal of the report of the learned Principal District Judge, Jamnagar indicates that vide notification dated 26.10.2020 of the Legal Department of the State, while conferring the jurisdiction of Commercial Courts upon the Senior Civil Judge (having experience in dealing with the commercial matters) exceptions have been made to the applications preferred under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act’ 1996. The jurisdiction to decide the applications under Arbitration Act’ 1996, however, is conferred upon the Commercial Courts to the Additional District Judge for the District and Taluka concerned.

5. There is also a reference of the decision of his Court dated 22.01.2019 in Special Civil Application No.4138 of 2018 holding that only the District Court will be competent for execution of award under Arbitration and Conciliation Act’ 1996.

6. Taking note of the reasoning given in the order impugned as also the detailed report submitted by the Principal District Judge, Jamnagar as well as the Government notification dated 26.10.2010 as also the subsequent notification dated 11.06.2024 No.B- Commercial/1422 of 2024 brought on record, no exception can be attached to the order of the Senior Civil Judge in arriving at the conclusion that it has no jurisdiction to try the execution application filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act’ 1996.

7. However, it is noteworthy that an error has been committed by the learned Judge in rejecting the application itself, which was originally filed before the District Court, Jamnagar and registered as Regular Civil Application No.01 of 2005. From a perusal of the order dated 29.01.2022 at page No.’73’ of the paper-book, it seems that the said execution application under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act’ 1996 filed in 2005 has been inadvertently transferred to the Court of Principal Senior Civil, Jamnagar in the year 2022, wherein it was renumbered as Regular Civil Application (Commercial) No.46 of 2022.

8. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge in paragraph No. ‘1’ of the order recorded that the execution application was transferred from one court to the another from time to time and it came to Court of Principal Senior Civil Jud