Patna High Court
M/s Bihar State Road Development Corporation Ltd.versusM/S M.G Contractors (P) Ltd. Head Office of M. G. House 1721, Sector 4,
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
The Additional District & Sessions Judge lacks jurisdiction to entertain the Section 34 petition; only the District Judge, as designated Commercial Court, may hear the matter.
Summary
The Bihar State Road Development Corporation Ltd. (BSRDCL) awarded a highway contract to M.G. Contractors, which later led to a dispute over site hindrances and contract performance. The matter was referred to arbitration, and the Arbitral Tribunal rendered an award granting the contractor monetary relief. BSRDCL challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before a District Judge, but the case was transferred to an Additional District & Sessions Judge who dismissed the petition. The appellant appealed under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act and Section 13(1‑A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, arguing that only the District Judge, designated as a Commercial Court by the 2019 notification, had jurisdiction. The Patna High Court held that the 02‑08‑2019 notification limits Commercial Court jurisdiction to the District Judge and Civil Judge (Senior Division) and does not extend to Additional District Judges. Consequently, the order of the Additional District Judge was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Issues considered
- The proper jurisdiction for hearing a Section 34 petition under the Arbitration Act in a commercial dispute under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
- Whether the Additional District & Sessions Judge has authority to entertain the petition despite the 2019 notification designating only the District Judge as the Commercial Court.
- The effect of Notification S.O.351 dated 02‑08‑2019 on the allocation of commercial dispute jurisdiction.
Legislation cited
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 34, 37
- Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — s. 13(1-A), 15, 21, 2(1)(c), 3
- Constitution of India — s. Article 236(a)
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Section 34
- Commercial Courts Act
- Jurisdiction
- Additional District Judge
- Notification 02‑08‑2019
- Public procurement
- Section 37
- Setting aside order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
COMMERCIAL APPEAL No.10 of 2024
======================================================
M/s Bihar State Road Development Corporation Ltd. (Govt. of Bihar
Undertaking) RCD Mechanical Workshop Campus Near Patna Airport,
Sheikhpura, Patna 800014 (BSRDCL)
... ... Appellant
Versus
M/S M.G Contractors (P) Ltd. Head Office of M. G. House 1721, Sector 4,
Panchkula, 134109 (Haryana)
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. P.K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Manish Dhari Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Pravashankar Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 08-04-2026
Heard Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Senior counsel for
the appellant and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the
sole respondent.
2. This appeal has been preferred under Section 37
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘Act of 1996’) read with Section 13(1-A) of
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (in short referred to as ‘the Act of
2015) for setting aside the judgment dated 30.07.2024
(hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned order’) passed by the
learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-VIIIth, Patna
(hereinafter referred called ‘the learned Court’).
3. By the impugned judgment under appeal, the
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
2/23
learned Court has been pleased to dismiss the Miscellaneous
Arbitration Case No. 171/2019 filed by the appellant under
Section 34 of the Act of 1996 challenging the award dated
09.07.2019 passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal.
Brief Facts of the Case
4. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
The appellant M/S Bihar State Road Development
Corporation Ltd. (Govt. of Bihar Undertaking) hereinafter
referred to as "BSRDCL", a public sector undertaking owned by
the Government of Bihar, floated a tender for implementation of
highway Projects, Phase-II, contract package 2, Sakaddi- Chandi
Sandesh-Sahar-Bihta-Danvara-Nasriganj Road (SH-81) length
86.80 km awarded the contract to one Patel Engineering Ltd.
However, the said contract was terminated by the appellant.
Thereafter, the said project was divided into two parts i.e. (1)
Sakaddi-Sahar Road section (0 to 44 =44 km) and (2) Sakaddi-
Nasriganj Road section (from 44 km to 83.250 =39.25 km).
5. The Respondent is a company inter-alia engaged
in construction of road etc. In response to the bids invited by the
appellant vide its invitation number BSHP-II/9/SH-81dated
19.01.2015 for improvement/ up-gradation of balance work in
Sakadi-Nasriganj Road section (from 44 km to 83.250= 39.25
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
3/23
km), the respondent/claimants vide its letter dated 28.02.2015
submitted its bid for an amount of Rs. 113,82,30,756.28/-. The
said bid price through competitive bidding was accepted by the
appellant "BSRDCL" vide its office letter number BSRDC LTD.
1546/2014/ (Part-1)/2015-1495 and accordingly, a letter of
acceptance dated 19.06.2015 ("LOA") was issued to the
claimant/respondent and through the same letter notification of
the award was also confirmed.
6. It appears from the pleadings available on the
record that after entering into the contract the
claimant/respondent submitted the work programme as required
under clause 8.3 of the contract document. In course of
execution, the claimant/respondent informed the appellant that
the site was full of hindrances, land were yet to be acquired and
there were many types of encroachments etc. and because of that
the claimant was suffering huge loss for idling manpower,
machinery and other incidental loss.
7. The claimant as per contract agreement served
notice for appointment of Dispute Board. Since the appellant did
not reply to the letter dated 29.06.2017, the claimant vide letter
dated 04.07.2017 requested the Indian Road Congress to
constitute a point Dispute Board for determination of interim
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
4/23
claim lodged by the claimant. Eventually, the appellant vide
letter dated 03.04.2018 agreed that since the Dispute Board has
not been constituted so far and therefore, in view of clause 20.6
of the contract agreement, the alleged dispute was referred to the
arbitration directly. Accordingly, the Arbitral Tribunal was
constituted.
8. The Hon’ble Arbitral Tribunal made the award on
the claims preferred by the claimant/respondent as per the
following details: –
Claim no. Particulars of Claim Amount Claim Amount awarded
(Rs) (Rs)
1. Claim for passing The Arbitral
declaration that the petitioner Tribunal declared
has breached the Clause 2.1 that Petitioner has
of the Contract-Agreement breached Clause 2.1
as it failed to provide and accordingly
hindrance free claim no.1 is
possession/access of site answered in favour
within the prescribed period of the
as per the contract Data Respondent/claimant
Document
2. Compensation due to extra 85,13,232/- Denied
utilization of staffs & labour
3. Compensation due to extra 2,12,83,353/- 2,12,83,353/-
utilization Machinery &
Equipment’s
4. Compensation due Loss of 7,88,11,283/- 7,88,11,283/-
Profits & Overhead Costs (3 a+b+c=
sub-claims as under) ( 3,23,26675+
(a) Loss of profit on account 1,00,19,122+
of delay after 31.08.2017 i.e. 3,64,66,486)
scheduled date of completion
– Rs. 3,23,26675/- Total=
(b) Loss of Profit on account 7,88,11,283/-
of shortfall of profit-
Rs.1,00,19,122/-
(c) Loss of Profit on account
of less produced work done
versus capacity and overhead
costs-Rs. 2,02,59,159/-
+1,62,07,327/- = Rs.
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
5/23
3,64,66,486/-
5. Loss on Account of 1,55,97,173.20 Denied
Depreciation of Machinery
& Equipment’s
6. Interest Payable on the @ 18% per 12% from the date
Claim Amount annum till of filing of statement
payment is of claims till the date
made of award and also
future interest at the
same rate till
realization.
7. Cost of Arbitration, legal fee 40,00,000/- Rs. 24,00,000/-
etc.
9. Being aggrieved by the award of the learned
Arbitral Tribunal, the appellant preferred an application under
Section 34 of the Act of 1996 before the learned District Judge
(now known as Principal District Judge) challenging the award
on various grounds including that the award has been made
without following the fundamental policies of law in India.
10. The learned District Judge/Principal District
Judge transferred the case to the court of Additional District
Judge/District and Additional Sessions Judge for hearing and
adjudication.
Submissions on behalf of the Appellant
11. Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Senior counsel for the
appellant has canvased a short point for consideration before this
Court. It is submitted that the dispute between the parties being
a “Commercial Dispute” within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (c)
of the Act of 2015, Section 34 application was filed before the
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
6/23
Commercial Court Act the impugned award has not been passed
by a Commercial Court, constituted under Section 3(1) of the
Act of 2015 vide Notification S.O.351 dated 02.08.2019,
published in the Bihar Gazette on 02.08.2019. It is his
submission that by virtue of the notification dated 02.08.2019,
the Government of Bihar in consultation with the High Court of
Judicature at Patna superseded the earlier notification as
contended in Memo No. 1150/J dated 03.03.2017 of the Law
Department, Bihar, Patna and was pleased to constitute:-
(a) the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) of each
district as Commercial Court to exercise original jurisdiction in
respect of commercial disputes where the value of suit or dispute
is not less than Rs.3 lacs and up to Rs.1 crore;
(b) the Court of District Judge in all the districts of the
State of Bihar as Commercial Courts to exercise original
Jurisdiction in respect of commercial disputes where the value
of the suit or dispute exceeds Rs. 1 Crore in respect of the entire
territorial area of the district;
(c) designate the Court of District Judge in each district as
Commercial Appellate Court to exercise appellate jurisdiction
and dispose of the appeals arising out of the judgments and
orders passed by a Commercial Court below the level of the
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
7/23
District Judge.
12. It is submitted that notification dated
02.08.2019 and its importance has been discussed by a learned
Single Judge of this Court in Civil Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
No.752 of 2023 (Bihar State Power (Holding) Company Limited
vs. Gammon India Limited) and other analogues matters. The
learned Single Judge discussed the relevant provisions of the Act
of 1996 and the Act of 2015 including the Notification dated
02.08.2019 and came to a conclusion that the District Judge
alone would be competent to exercise original jurisdiction in
respect of commercial dispute where the value of the suit or
dispute exceeds Rs.1 crore in respect of the entire territorial area
of the district.
13. Learned Senior counsel has further relied upon
the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of M/s
Vishal Builtech India Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Union of India in
MJC No. 1323 of 2018. In the said judgment dated 03.08.2018,
the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court directed transfer of
Arbitration Miscellaneous Case No. 01/2016 from the Court of
Additional District & Sessions Judge-V, Patna to the Court of
Commercial Court which is the District Judge, Patna.
14. Learned Senior Counsel has further relied upon
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
8/23
another Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of
M/s Johnson Paints Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s Johnson Paints Co. in
Commercial Appeal No. 08 of 2024, in which vide judgment
dated 09.09.2024, the Hon’ble Division Bench held that it is the
District Judge, Patna, who has been constituted as a Commercial
Court under the Act of 2015. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Division
Bench interfered with the order of the learned District Judge,
Patna passed on 04.01.2024 by which he had transferred the
records to the Court of learned Additional District Judge-XIV,
Patna. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court accepted the
submissions on behalf of the appellant before this Court in the
said appeal that the learned District Judge erred in making over
the case with the ADJ Court. Accordingly, the records were
ordered to be transferred to the Court of the learned District
Judge, Patna.
Submissions on behalf of the Respondent
15. Responding to the submissions of the learned se-
nior counsel for the appellant, Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, learned coun-
sel for the sole respondent has vehemently tried to persuade us
to differ with the opinion of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this
Court and to refer the matter to a Larger Bench.
16. Learned counsel submits that on a bare reading of
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
9/23
the notification dated 02.08.2019, it would be crystal clear that it
is the court of the District Judge which has been constituted as
Commercial Court under Section 3 (1) of the Act of 2015.
Learned counsel has placed before this Court, Article 236 of the
Constitution of India to submit that under Chapter-VI heading
Sub-ordinate Courts, it is provided that the expression District
Judge includes Judge of City Civil Courts, Additional District
Judges, Joint District Judges, Assistant District Judges, Chief
Judges of Small Cause Courts, Sessions Judges, Additional
Sessions Judges and Assistant Sessions Judges, Chief
Presidency Magistrates and Additional Chief Presidency
Magistrate. Thus, according to Article 236 (a) of the
Constitution of India, the Additional District Judge would come
within the meaning of the word ‘District Judge’.
17. Learned counsel has further submitted that the Act
of 2015 has adopted the meaning of the word ‘District Judge’ as
occurring under Article 236 (a) of the Constitution of India. In
this regard, he refers Section 2 (1) (e) of the Act of 2015.
18. In order to strengthen the submissions, learned
counsel for the sole respondent has placed before this Court the
Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jaycee
Housing Private Limited & Another Vs. Registrar (General)
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
10/23
Orissa High Court, Cuttack & Ors. (2023)1 SCC 54 and the
Judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of
Kasim V.K. Vs. M. Ashraf reported in 2021 SCC OnLine Ker
1668 (Arb. A. No. 37 of 2020). Attention of this Court has been
drawn towards paragraph ‘20’ of the judgment of Kerala High
Court wherein it has been held that the Additional District Judge
shall exercise the same powers as the District Judge. The Kerala
High Court held that there is no jurisdictional error in Additional
District Judges hearing petitions filed under the Act of 1996.
19. Learned counsel has also relied upon the judgment
of the Hon’ble Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court
in the case of Yashwardhan Raghuwanshi vs. District and
Sessions Judge and Another reported in 2021 SCC OnLine
MP 457. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High
Court held that in respect of commercial dispute involving
arbitration only the Commercial Court of the status of the
District Judge or Additional District Judge would be competent
court to entertain the matters under Sections 9, 14, 34 and 36 of
the Arbitration Act of 1996. It has also been held that the
impugned order to the extent of classifying the commercial
disputes having arbitration as subject matter on the basis of mere
valuation and conferring powers therefor on the Court of Civil
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
11/23
Judge Class-I, Bhopal would be violative of the relevant
provisions of law. However, it can be sustained in so far as
distribution of the work of commercial disputes as per the value
of the claim in cases other than arbitration matter are concerned.
It has been further held that the District Judge by virtue of
Sections 7 and 15 of the Civil Courts Act of 1958 would be
entitled to distribute such work amongst any of the Additional
District Judges under his supervision, but not to any court of
Civil Judge Class-I or Senior Civil Judge, or any other court of
Small Causes.
20. Drawing strength from the aforementioned
judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and Madhya
Pradesh, learned counsel for the respondent submits that perhaps
the attention of the Hon’ble Divisional Benches of this Court in
the case of M/s Vishal Builtech India Pvt. Ltd. and M/s John-
son Paints Pvt. Ltd. (supra) could not be drawn towards
Article 236 (a) of the Constitution of India and Section 2 (1) (e)
of the Act of 2015. It is for this reason this Court may refer this
matter to a Larger Bench.
Consideration
21. This Court has heard learned senior counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel for the sole respondent as also
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
12/23
perused the records. There is no contest that the dispute involved
in this case is a commercial dispute as defined under Section
2(1) (c) of the Act of 2015.
22. The basic point which has been raised before this
Court for consideration arises out of the Notification dated
02.08.2019, by which the Commercial Court has been
constituted in the State of Bihar. Previously, the Notification
vide Memo No. 1150/J dated 03.03.2017 of Law Department,
Bihar was issued which has been superseded by the Notification
dated 02.08.2019. Both the Gazette Notifications are quoted
hereunder in chronological order for ready reference:-
“fcgkj xtV
vlk/kkj.k vad
fcgkj ljdkj }kjk izdkf”kr
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
16 QkYxqu 1938 ¼”k0½
¼la0 iVuk 189½ iVuk] eaxyokj] 7 ekpZ 2017
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
fof/k foHkkx
&&&&&&
vf/klwpuk,a
3 ekpZ 2017
,l0 vks0 11] fnukad 7 ekpZ 2017& ‘The Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division And Commercial Appellate Division of
High Courts Act, 2015’ (No.-4 of 2016) dh /kkjk&3 }kjk iznRr
“kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] fcgkj jkT; ljdkj] ,rn}kjk] iVuk mPp
U;k;ky; ds ijke”kZ ls] ,d djksM+ :i;s vFkok blls vf/kd ewY; ds okf.kfT;d
fooknksa dh lquokbZ gsrq] jkT; ds lHkh izeaMfy; eq[;ky;ksa esa fLFkr ftyk O;ogkj
U;k;ky;ksa esa okf.kfT;d U;k;ky; (Commercial Courts) xfBr djrh gS
rFkk izeaMyh; eq[;ky; fLFkr O;ogkj U;k;ky; esa inLFkkfir ftyk U;k;k/kh”k
(District Judge) dks mDr izeaMy esa blds v/khu xfBr okf.kfT;d U;k;ky;
dk U;k;k/kh”k fu;qDr djrh gS] tks vius lkekU; dk;ksZa ds vfrfjDr bl
U;k;ky; dk Hkh dk;Z djsaxs(
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
13/23
¼d½ bu U;k;ky;ksa dh LFkkuh; vf/kdkfjrk lacaf/kr izeaMy dh jktLo lhek,a gksxh]
¼[k½ ;g vf/klwpuk jkti= esa blds izdk”ku dh frfFk ls izo`r gksxhA
¼la0la0 ,0@,DV&10@2016&1150@ts0½
fcgkj&jkT;iky ds vkns”k ls
lqjsUnz izlkn “kekZ]
ljdkj ds lfpoA
,l0vks0 12] ,l0vks0 11] fnukad 7 ekpZ 2017 dk vaxzsth esa fuEufyf[kr
vuqokn fcgkj&jkT;iky ds izkf/kdkj ls blds }kjk izdkf”kr fd;k tkrk gS] tks
Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn&348 ds [k.M ¼3½ ds v/khu mldk izkf/kd`r ikB
le>k tk;sxkA
¼la0la0 ,0@,DV&10@2016&1150@ts0½
fcgkj&jkT;iky ds vkns”k ls
lqjsUnz izlkn “kekZ]
ljdkj ds lfpoA
The 3rd March 2017
S.O. 11, dated the 7th March 2017- In exercise of the
powers conferred by section 3 of ‘The Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division And Commercial Appellate Division of
High Courts Act, 2015’ (No.-4 of 2016), the State Government
of Bihar, in consultation with the High Court of Judicature at
Patna, is hereby pleased to constitute the Commercial Court in
the District Civil Courts situated in all the Divisional Head
quarters of the State to hear cases of Commercial disputes of the
value of Rupees one crore or above and appoints the District
Judge posted in the Civil Court of the Divisional Headquarter as
Judge of the Commercial Court constituted hereunder in the
concerned Division, who will discharge the duties of this court
in addition to his normal duties;
(a) The local jurisdiction of these courts shall be the
revenue limits of the concerned Division,
(b) This Notification shall come into force with effect
from the date of its publication in the official Gazette.
(F.No. A/Act-10/2016-1150/J)
By Order of the Governor of Bihar
Surendra Prasad Sharma,
Secretary to the Government.
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
14/23
fcgkj xtV
vlk/kkj.k vad
fcgkj ljdkj }kjk izdkf”kr
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
11 Jko.k 1941 ¼”k0½
¼la0 iVuk 912½ iVuk] “kqØokj] 2 vxLr 2019
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
fof/k foHkkx
&&&&&&
vf/klwpuk
2 vxLr 2019
,l0vks0 351] fnukad 2 vxLr 2019& fof/k foHkkx] fcgkj] iVuk ds vf/klwpuk
la[;k 5080 fnukad 25-07-2019 ¼fcgkj xtV la[;k 869 fnukad 25-07-2019
lgifBr ,l0vks0 347 fnukad 25-07-2019 }kjk izdkf”kr½ ftlds }kjk jkT; esa
okf.kfT;d U;k;ky;ksa ,oa okf.kfT;d vihyh; U;k;ky;ksa dk xBu fd;k x;k gS]
ds vaxzsth Hkk’kk ds izkf/kd`r ikB dks fuEufyf[kr }kjk izfrLFkkfir fd;k tkrk gS
%&
NOTIFICATION
S. 0.351, dated 2nd August 2019-In exercise of the powers
conferred by Section 3 of The Commercial Courts, Commercial Appellate Courts,
Commercial Divisions and Commercial Appellate Divisions of High Courts Act,
2015 (No. 4 of 2016), the State Government of Bihar, in consultation with the
High Court of Judicature at Patna superseding the previously issued notification
memo no.-1150/J dated-03.03.17 of Law Department, Bihar, Patna on the subject,
is hereby pleased to:-
(a) constitute the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) of each
district as a Commercial Court to exercise original jurisdiction in
respect of commercial disputes where the value of the suit or
dispute is not less than Rs. 3 Lacs and up to Rs.1 Crore;
(b) constitute the Court of District Judge in all the districts of the
State of Bihar as a Commercial Court to exercise original
Jurisdiction in respect of commercial disputes where the value of
the suit or dispute exceeds Rs.1 Crore in respect of the entire
territorial area of the district; and
(c) designate the Court of District Judge in each district as
Commercial Appellate Court to exercise appellate jurisdiction and
dispose of the appeals arising out of the judgments and orders
passed by a Commercial Court below the level of the District
Judge.
This notification shall come into force with effect from the date of its
publication in the official Gazette.
(File No.-A/act-10/2016/5250/J)
By Order of the Governor of Bihar,
MADAN KISHORE KAUSHIK,
Secretary to Government of Bihar.”
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
15/23
23. It is evident on going through the Hon’ble
Division Bench judgments of this Court in the case of M/s
Vishal Builtech India Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Johnson Paints Pvt.
Ltd. (supra) that identical issue had come up for consideration
before this Court on the earlier occasion. In the case of M/s
Vishal Builtech India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), an application was
filed under Section 15(5) of the Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of
High Courts Act, 2015 (as known earlier) seeking transfer of
Miscellaneous Arbitration Case No. 01/2016 from the Court of
Additional District Judge-V, Patna to the Commercial Court
constituted under Section 3 of the Act. This Miscellaneous
Arbitration Case was registered on a petition under Section 34 of
the Act of 1996 for setting aside the Award dated 17.12.2015
rendered by Arbitral Tribunal.
24. After filing of the petition, learned District
Judge, Patna transferred the records to the court of the
Additional District Judge-V, Patna but the learned Additional
District Judge-V was of the view that under the Act of 2015, the
jurisdiction to adjudicate the commercial dispute lies only with
the Commercial Court notified under the Act of 2015. The
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge requested the
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
16/23
District Judge to issue directions regarding return of the case to
his court. The District and Sessions Judge, Patna replied vide
letter dated 30.02.2018 informing him that he had orally called
for the records of Arbitration Miscellaneous Case No. 01/2016
and had come to a conclusion that the Award dated 17.12.2015
passed by the Arbitrator was under challenge and because this
arbitration has arisen out of Request Case No. 06 of 2023,
hence, the matter could not come under the purview of the
Commercial Court.
25. In the aforementioned background of the facts
placed before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, the
Hon’ble Division Bench took a view that there was no
ambiguity at all that the District Judge, Patna had already been
notified as the Commercial Court for the Patna Division only
and he would have the jurisdiction to hear, consider and decide
the concerned matter. Accordingly, order was passed.
26. Similarly, this Court finds that in the case of
M/s Johnson Paints Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the defendant in
Commercial Dispute Case No. 02 of 2023 had moved this Court
against the order of the learned District Judge, Patna passed on
04.01.2024 transferring the case to the Court of learned ADJ-
XIV. It appears that a preliminary objection was taken on behalf
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
17/23
of the respondent before this Court as regards the very
maintainability of the Commercial appeal against the order of
transfer of the case to the court of the learned Court of ADJ-
XIV. It was contended that the order of the learned District
Judge, Patna passed on 04.01.2024 is not one of the orders
envisaged under Order XLIII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908
(in short ‘CPC’), therefore, no appeal would lie. The Hon’ble
Division Bench, even as agreed with the objection as to
maintainability of the appeal, took a view that the order can be
challenged under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India but
refused to reject the appeal only for the reason of the aforesaid
contention. The Hon’ble Division Bench took a view as under:-
“5. ….…..We would not reject the appeal only by reason
of the aforesaid contention, since we are entitled to
invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226/227; which we
suo motu exercise, especially considering the fact that
the very intention behind the enactment; i.e.
Commercial Courts Act, is for speedy disposal of the
commercial matters.”
27. The Hon’ble Division Bench noticed the notification
issued by the Bihar Government under Section 3 of the Act of
2015, referred the earlier judgment of the Hon’ble Division
Bench in the case of M/s Vishal Builtech India Pvt. Ltd.
(supra) and Jaycee Housing Private Limited and concluded in
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
18/23
paragraph no. 25 of its judgment as under:-
“25. It is also required to be noted that even as per
Section 15 of the 2015 Act, all suits and applications
including applications under the 1996 Act, relating to a
commercial dispute of specified value shall have to be
transferred to the Commercial Court. Even as per
Section 21 of the 2015 Act, the 2015 Act, shall have
overriding effect. It provides that save as otherwise
provided, the provisions of this Act shall have effect,
notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith
contained in any other law for the time being in force.”
28. At this stage, this Court would briefly take note
of the judgment cited on behalf of the sole respondent at the Bar.
On going through the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High
Court in the case of Kasim V.K. (supra), it is found that the
Hon’ble Kerala High Court has discussed the judgment of the
Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court on the same question in
the case of Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board & Anr.
vs. Ansaldo Energia, S.P.A & Anr reported in AIR 2008 M.P.
328. In paragraph no.20 of its judgment, the Hon’ble Kerala
High Court has recorded as under:-
“20. In the context of the Kerala Civil Courts Act
also such an argument of the learned counsel cannot
hold good. Section 2 of the Civil Courts Act provides
three category of positions namely, the court of a
District Judge, the court of a Subordinate Judge and
the court of a Munsiff. Section 3 provides for
establishment of district court. Going by Sub-Section
(2) of Section 3 of the Civil Courts Act, the
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
19/23
Government shall establish a district court for each
district and a Judge shall be appointed to such court.
Section 4 provides for appointment of Additional
District Judges. Under Sub-Section (1) of Section 4
when the state of business pending before a district
court so requires, one or more Additional District
Judges may be appointed to that court for such
period as it deemed necessary. Sub-section (2) of
Section 4 says that an Additional District Judge shall
discharge all or any of the functions of the District
Judge under this Act in respect of all matters which
the District Jude may assign to him, or which under
the provision of Section 7 may be instituted before
him and in the discharge of those functions he shall
exercise the same powers as the District Judge.
When such additional district courts are established
and Additional District Judges are appointed, Sub-
section (2) of Section 4 of the Civil Courts Act
empowers the Additional District Judges so
appointed with powers to discharge all the functions
of the District Judges. It is very specific when it is
provided that the Additional District Judge shall
exercise the same powers as the District Judge. That
is why it is stated that Principal District Judge is only
first among equals among the District Judges in a
district. In the circumstance, there is no jurisdictional
error in Additional District Judges hearing petitions
filed under the Act.”
29. It is evident on going through the judgment of
the Hon’ble Kerala High Court that Section ‘2’ of the Civil
Courts Act provided three categories of positions namely, (i) the
Court of a District Judge (ii) the Court of a Subordinate Judge
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
20/23
and (iii) the Court of a Munsif. Keeping in view the said
classification of the Courts, it is opined that the Government has
to establish a district court for each district and a judge shall be
appointed to such Court.
30. By interpreting Section ‘4’ and its various sub-
Sections, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court was of the view that
the Additional District Judge shall exercise the same power as
the District Judge.
31. We regret our inability to agree with the views
expressed by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of
Kasim V.K. (supra). At this stage, we would refer the relevant
provisions of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act,
1887 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1887’) that existed at
the relevant time. Chapter II of the Act of 1887 with the heading
“Constitution of Civil Courts” provides for the Classes of the
Courts. Section 3 of the Act of 1887 reads as under:-
“3. Classes of Courts.-There shall be the following
classes of Civil Courts under this Act, namely:-
(1) the Court of the District Judge;
(2) the Court of the Additional Judge;
(3) the Court of the 3[Civil Judge (Senior Division];
and
(4) the Court of the 3[Civil Judge (Junior Division)]”
3. Subs by Bihar Amdt. Act, 2013 (Act No.14 of 2014) vide Bihar Gazettte
(Ex. Ord.) No. 697, dt. 25.08.2014).
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
21/23
32. Since we are concerned with the construction and
interpretation of the Notification dated 02.08.2019 and a
contention has been raised that the Court of District Judge
would take within its compass the Court of Additional District
Judges also because they are same in status by virtue of Article
236(a) of the Constitution of India, it would be important to take
note of Section ‘8’ of the Act of 1887 hereunder:-
“8. Additional Judges.-(1) When the business
pending before any District Judge requires the aid of
Additional Judges for its speedy disposal, the 2[State]
3
Government may, [having consulted] the High
Court 4[***], appoint such Additional Judges as may
be requisite.
(2) Additional Judges so appointed shall discharge
any of the functions of a District Judge which the
District Judge may assign to them, and in the
discharge of those functions, they shall exercise the
same powers as the District Judge.”
33. A conjoint reading of Section ‘3’ and Section ‘8’
of the Act of 1887 would leave no room for doubt that the Court
of the District Judge and that of the Court of the Additional
Judge are two different Courts. There is no iota of doubt that the
Court of the Additional Judges have been envisaged for the
2. Subs. by the A.L.O.
3. Subs. by the A.L.O. for "upon the recommendation of."
4."And with the previous sanction of the Governor General in Council" rep. by Act 16 of
1911, S.3.
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
22/23
speedy disposal of the cases pending before any District Judge
and once the same is assigned to an Additional Judge by the
District Judge, he would discharge his duties in respect of the
assigned matters and while doing so, the learned Additional
Judges would carry on the functions of a District Judge, they
shall exercise the same power as the District Judge.
34. To this Court, it is evident that the Notification
dated 02.08.2019, constituting a Commercial Court under
Section 3 of the Act of 2015 has kept itself confined to the Court
of Civil Judge (Senior Division) and to the Court of District
Judge, in all the Districts of the State of Bihar. The Notification
dated 02.08.2019 as framed cannot be construed in the manner
suggested by learned counsel for the sole respondent.
35. The District Judge (now known as ‘Principal
District Judge) of a District who has been constituted as a
Commercial Court within the meaning of Act of 2015 does not
derive any power to further transfer its adjudicatory power as a
Commercial Court to the Additional Judges. This was obviously
not the position under the Kerala Civil Court Rules.
36. We find no plausible reason to take a different
view from that of our own Division Bench in the case of M/s
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.10 of 2024 dt.08-04-2026
23/23
Johnson Paints Pvt. Ltd. (supra).
37. This appeal succeeds on this point alone. The
impugned judgment dated 30.07.2024 passed by the learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge-VIII, Patna is hereby set
aside.
38. In the nature of the issue placed before this
Court, we have not entered into the merit of the ‘award’ and the
impugned judgment is being set aside on the ground stated
above.
39. The records of the learned Court together with
the Arbitral records and a copy of the judgment of this Court be
sent down to the Court of learned Principle and District Judge,
Patna for adjudication within a reasonable period.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Devendra/harsh
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 15.04.2026
Transmission 15.04.2026
Date
Checking your session…