Supreme Court A Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice R. Mahadevan, while allowing the appeals, observed: “The ‘Court’ under Section 29A shall be the Civil Court of ordinary original jurisdiction in a district and includes the High Court in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction

The Supreme Court held that the ‘Court’ under Section 29A for extension of time of an arbitral tribunal is the Civil Court of ordinary original jurisdiction in a district, including a High Court exercising ordinary original civil jurisdiction under Section 2(1)(e), and shall not be the High Court or the Supreme Court exercising powers under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court further held that Section 42 of the Act, relating to exclusive jurisdiction of the Court where the first application is made, does not apply to applications under Section 11 and therefore cannot be invoked to confer jurisdiction on the High Court for purposes of Section 29A. The Court was hearing civil appeals arising out of orders of the Bombay High Court, which had held that applications under Section 29A(4) would lie before the High Court where the arbitrator had been appointed by the High Court under Section 11(6). Also Read – Section 47 CPC Cannot Be Invoked After Decree Is Fully Executed: Supreme Court A Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice R. Mahadevan, while allowing the appeals, observed: “The ‘Court’ under Section 29A shall be the Civil Court of ordinary original jurisdiction in a district and includes the High Court in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction under Section 2(1)(e), and shall not be the High Court or the Supreme Court under Section 11(6) of the Act. Equally, Section 42 of the Act relating to jurisdiction for application will not apply to Section 11 of the Act.” The Bench further held that “the conclusion on the ground that there will be hierarchical difficulties, conflict of power or jurisdictional anomaly if a Civil Court entertains an application under Section 29A for extension of time of an arbitral tribunal if the High Court under Section 11(6) of the Act has appointed the arbitrator(s) is untenable.”