STATE OF WEST BENGAL & Ors. v. ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Judgment
A B c [2014] 10 S.C.R. 426 STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. v. ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS (Civil Appeal No. 6691 of 2005) SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 [R.M. LODHA CJI, KURIAN JOSEPH AND R.F. NARIMAN, JJ.] Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: ss.34, 42 - Which Court will have the jurisdiction to entertain and decide an application u/s.34 of the Act - Held: The "Court" would be the High Court and not the District Court. s.42 - Applicability of - Held: The expression "with D respect to an arbitration agreement" makes it clear that s. 42 will apply to all applications made whether before or during arbitral proceedings or after an award is pronounced under Part-I of the Act. E s.42 - Court - Meaning of. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. The "Court" for the purpose of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would be the F High Court and not the District Court. It is the superior most court exercising original jurisdiction which has been chosen to adjudicate disputes arising out of arbitration agreements. [Para 15] [436-H; 437-C] G Executive Engineer, Road Development Division No. Ill, Panvel & Anr. v. Atlanta Limited AIR 2014 SC 1093: 2014 SCR 507 - relied on.
#2. Section 11 applications are not to be moved before H 426 STATE OF WEST BENGAL v. ASSOCIATED CONTRACTORS 427 the "court" as defined but before the Chief Justice either A of the High Court or of the Supreme Court, as the case may be, or their delegates. Section 42 would not apply to such applications. [para 16) [439-E, F] Pandey & Co. Builders (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Anr., 8 (2007) 1 SCC 467: 2006 (8) Suppl. SCR 997; P. Anand Gajapathi Raju & Ors. v. P. V. G. Raju (Dead) & Ors. (2000) 4 SCC 539: 2000 (2) SCR 684; P. Kasilingam & Ors. v. P.S.G. College of Technology & Ors. (1995) Suppl. 2 SCC 348: 1995 (2) SCR 1061; Rodemadan India Ltd. v. International Trade C Expo Centre Ltd. (2006) 11SCC651; S.B.P. and Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd. & Anr. (2005) 8 SCC 618: 2005 (4) Suppl. SCR 688; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Saith and Skelton (P) Ltd., (1972) 1 sec 702: 1972 (3) SCR 233 - relied on. Guru Nanak Foundation v. Rattan Singh & Sons (1981) D
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.