Gujarat High Court
Vijay Cotton And Fiber Company vs Jay Dwarkadhish Cotton ... on 6 October, 2021
Bench: A. P. Thaker
C/AO/86/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 86 of 2020
==========================================================
VIJAY COTTON AND FIBER COMPANY
Versus
JAY DWARKADHISH COTTON INDUSTRIES THROUGH CHAIRMAN
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND B GOGIA(5849) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR BB GOGIA(5851) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS MUSKAN A GOGIA(6624) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR AB MUNSHI(1238) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RC SEJPAL(2636) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 06/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr.Anand B. Gogia for the appellant
and learned advocate Mr.A.M.Munshi for the respondents.
2. By order dated 10.5.2019, learned Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Morbi, exercising powers under Section 151 read with
Rule 10 of Order VII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ordered to
return back the papers of Execution Application No.32 of 2017
filed by the appellant. The present Appeal from Order is directed
against the said order. The Court below returned the papers to
present the same before the Court having jurisdiction.
3. The facts are that an arbitral award came to be passed in
favor of the appellant in Arbitration No.61 of 2011-12 on
13.2.2012. The appellant- Judgment Creditor filed Execution
Application No.35 of 2013 before the Court of learned Principal
C/AO/86/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2021
District Judge, Morbi under Section 36 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 on 18.2.2014 seeking to execute the same
arbitral award. By order dated 24.10.2017, learned District
Judge, Morbi referring to Notification dated 16.8.2017 of the
Legal Department, Government of Gujarat, ordered the case to
be transferred to the Commercial Court of Judicial District,
Morbi.
3.1 The appellant thereafter presented the Arbitration
Execution Application before the learned learned Principal
Senior Civil Judge, Morbi. The application came to be
renumbered as Commercial Execution Application No.32 of
2017.
3.2 The operative portion of the impugned order is as under.
"The Execution Petition is ordered to be returned
back under section 151 read with Rule 10 of Order
VII to I- Schedule of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as
amended by Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment),
Act, 2002, for presentation of it, in the Court having
Jurisdiction.
No order as to cost.
Signed and pronounced in the open court on this 10th day
of
May, 2019.
Place: Morbi
Date 10.5.2019
Sd/-
(Yogesh Narendrakumar Patel)
Code No.GJ00664
(Principal Senior Civil Judge)
Presiding Office- Commercial Court,
Morbi- Dist. Morbi."
4. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that
impugned order is contrary to law and learned Judge was not
right in returning the plaint. It is submitted that the learned
C/AO/86/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2021
Principal Senior Civil Judge, Morbi, is one of the Specified Court
as Commercial Court of Judicial District of Morbi dealing with
the commercial disputes having valuation of not less than three
lakh rupees.
5. In course of the hearing, attention of the Court was drawn
to the Notification dated 26.10.2020 issued by the Legal
Department. The said Notification issued in exercise of powers
conferred by sub- section (1) of Section 3 read with Section 3(1-
A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, thereby the State
Government in consultation with the High Court specified the
course showing in the schedule of the Notification in the area of
local limits of the jurisdiction as Commercial Courts for dealing
with commercial disputes of the specified value. The schedule is
as under.
Sr.No. Name of the Court Areas of
Jurisdiction/
Courts
1 Two judges of the City Civil Court, City Civil Court,
Ahmedabad (having experience in dealing Ahmedabad
with commercial disputes)
2 One Additional District Judge where the District Court and
subject matter of an arbitration is a Taluka Court
Commercial dispute of a specified value of not
less than 3 lakh rupees and intellectual
property rights related suits or proceedings,
having the specified Value of not less than 3
lakh rupees.
3 Three Senior Civil Judges (having experience District Court
in dealing with commercial disputes) for the Headquarters at
commercial dispute having the specified value
of not less than three lakh rupees except the Ahmedabad
applications preferred under the Arbitration (Rural)
and Conciliation Act, 1996 and intellectual Vadodara
property rights related suits or proceedings. Surat
Rajkot
4 One Senior Civil Judge (having experience in All District Courts
C/AO/86/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/10/2021
dealing with commercial disputes) for the except mentioned
commercial dispute having the Specified at column No.3 of
Value of not less than three lakh rupees Sr.no.3 and all
except the applications preferred under the Taluka Courts.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and
intellectual property rights related suits or
proceedings.
6. In view of what is provided in above Notification since the
monetary value involved is sixty-four lakh rupees, the clause
No.2 in the schedule above will apply. The Additional District
Judge will have jurisdiction to deal with and try with the
Execution Petition. In light of the above, the impugned order is
set aside.
7. The appellant therefore may file proceedings of Execution
Petition before the District Judge, Morbi which will have the
jurisdiction.
The Appeal from Order is disposed of accordingly.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(DR. A. P. THAKER, J)
Manshi
