Nilu Agrawal JUDGMENT
V.N. Sinha, J.
1. In the miscellaneous appeal learned Single Judge of this Court under order No. 20 dated 25.02.2011 referred the appeal for authoritative consideration by a Division Bench of this Court to decide the question as to whether Subordinate Judge or the District Judge is Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district within the meaning of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). In this connection, learned Single Judge doubted the correctness of the judgment of this Court in the case of The Executive Engineer, Central Public Works Department and others v. M/s. R.L. Singh, Civil Engineer MANU/BH/0155/1997 : 1997(1) PLJR 523 and the subsequent decisions of this Court in the case of Md. Sidique v. State of Bihar MANU/BH/1283/2000 : 2000(4) PLJR 814, Thakur Prasad Singh v. The State of Bihar and Anr. MANU/BH/1289/2000 : 2000(4) PLJR 843 and Bhopal Singh and others v. Nagendra Narain Singh & others MANU/BH/0217/2001 : 2001(2) PLJR 530 in the reference order.
2. The connected writ petition has also been referred under Order No. 5 dated 26.02.2013 to be heard along with the appeal in the light of the reference order to consider the same question in the light of the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Fountain Head Developers & etc. v. Mrs. Maria Arcangela Sequeira deceased by L.R.'s & Ors., etc. MANU/MH/0208/2007 : AIR 2007 Bombay 149 Full Bench.
3. The Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 37(1)(b) of the Act assailing the order dated 21.04.2007 passed by Sub-Judge-I, Patna City in Miscellaneous Application No. 3 of 2007, whereunder the Subordinate Judge dismissed the Miscellaneous Application filed under Section 34 of the Act on the ground that the application was filed after prescribed time on 16.04.2007 and no petition for condonation of delay has been filed by the applicant further holding that Sub-Judge has no jurisdiction to set aside the impugned award dated 05.02.2007 passed by retired Judge of the High Court Mr. Justice R.N. Prasad.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that according to sub-section (3) of Section 34 of the Act, an application for setting aside award passed by the arbitrator appointed under the Act may not be entertained if filed, after three months have elapsed, from the date on which the party filing the application had received the arbitral award. In the instant case, the impugned award is dated 05.02.2007, the application assailing the same under Section 34 of the Act was filed on 16.04.2007 i.e. within three months, as such, there was no occasion for the learned Subordinate Judge not to entertain and reject the application on the ground of limitation. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the court below has erroneously held that Sub-Judge has no jurisdiction to set aside the award passed by a retired Judge of the High Court. According to learned counsel Chapter VII Section 34 of the Act provide for recourse against arbitral award. The award passed by any arbitrator appointed under the Act if required to be assailed the sam........