BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH v. Shriram Chits

On behalf of the petitioner Shri Kukday, the learned counsel would contend that since it is a award of the Arbitrator, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would be applicable and, therefore, the proceedings filed for execution before the learned Joint Civil Judge are not maintainable. In my view, in the teeth of the scheme as provided in the Chit Fund Act, 1982, the said submission cannot be countenanced. Under the said Act the disputes are referred to the Arbitrator in terms of Section 64. The subsequent statutory provisions unmistakably point out the application of the Civil Procedure Code to the conduct of the proceedings by the Arbitrator. The main defining sections are Sections 69 and 71. In terms of Section 69, the Registrar has to pronounce the award in respect of the disputes referred to him. In terms of Section 71 every order passed by the Registrar or the nominee under sections 68 or 69 and every order passed by the State Government in appeal under section 70 for payment of any money shall, if not carried out, be deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court and shall be executed in the same manner as decree of such Court. In my view, considering the statutory provisions, the proceedings for execution filed before the Joint Civil Judge cannot be said to be filed in a Court, which does not have

19.07wp.3029.11.odt 3 jurisdiction though the Registrar is an arbitrator in terms of the said act the machinery provided in the said Act would govern the execution of the award passed by the Registrar. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 7.2.2011 cannot be faulted with. No case for interference is made out. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. sahare JUDGE