Patna High Court
East Central Railway through the Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) East Central Railway,versusArjun Engicon Pvt. Ltd.,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Additional Sessions Judge lacked jurisdiction as a Commercial Court, so its order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Principal District Judge.
Summary
The East Central Railway appealed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge who dismissed its Section 34 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and affirmed an arbitral award, modifying the interest rate from 16% to 9%. The High Court examined whether the Additional Sessions Judge, acting as a Commercial Court, had jurisdiction to decide the matter after the Principal District Judge had been designated as the Commercial Court under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Relying on its earlier decision in Bihar State Road Development Corporation Ltd. v. M.G Contractors (P) Ltd., the Court held that a District Judge constituted as a Commercial Court cannot transfer its adjudicatory powers to Additional Judges. Consequently, the order of the Additional Sessions Judge was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Principal District Judge for fresh consideration of the Section 34 application. The Court directed the records to be sent to the Principal District Judge and ordered the appeal to be disposed of accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the Additional Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to entertain the Section 34 application after the Principal District Judge was designated as the Commercial Court under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
- Whether the modification of the interest rate in the arbitral award by the Additional Sessions Judge was within its jurisdiction.
Legislation cited
- Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 — s. 8
- Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — s. 3
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Section 34
- Commercial Court
- Jurisdiction
- Additional Judge
- Principal District Judge
- Interest rate modification
- Arbitral award enforcement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
COMMERCIAL APPEAL No.3 of 2025
======================================================
East Central Railway through the Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) East
Central Railway, Mughalsarai, namely Anil Kumr Singh, aged about 58 years,
Gender Male, Son of Jagdish Singh, Resident of Qtr. No. C/V- 1, Basant
Vihar Colony, Mughalsarai, P.S. Mughalsarai, District Chandauli and
presently through Rameshwar Singh, Aged about 59 years, Gender Male, Son
of Shyam Narayan Singh, Resident of Qtr. No. 1602, Type - V, European
Colony, Mughalsarai, P.S. Mughalsarai, District Chandauli.
... ... Appellant
Versus
Arjun Engicon Pvt. Ltd., J-177, P.C. Colony, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna -
800020 through its Director Ravi Bhushan, Resident of J-117, P.C. Colony,
P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna.
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG
Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Senior Counsel
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, CGC
For the Respondent : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 17-04-2026
Heard Dr. K.N. Singh, learned ASG assisted by Mr.
Bindhyachal Rai, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and Mr.
Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present appeal arises out of the order dated
21.07.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII,
Patna in Miscellaneous (Arbitration) Case No. 14 of 2018 by
which the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII has been pleased
to dismiss the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.3 of 2025 dt.17-04-2026
2/6
Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended up to date) (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘Act of 1996 (as amended up to date)’) and
affirmed the award dated 21.09.2017 passed by the learned
Arbitral Tribunal whereunder the present appellant has been
directed to make payment of Rs.46,45,228/- to the
claimant/respondent within three months, failing which the amount
will carry the interest at the rate of 16% per annum from the date
of award. The learned court, however, modified the rate of interest
to 9% per annum instead of 16% per annum.
3. In the nature of the order proposed to be passed with
the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this Court need not
go into the factual details of the present matter.
4. It is an admitted position that Section 34 application
has been heard and decided by learned Additional Sessions Judge
on transfer of the records by the learned Principal District Judge,
Patna.
5. This Court has taken a consistent view that it is the
court of learned District Judge (now known as Principal District
Judge) who is the Commercial Court in terms of the Notification
dated 2nd August, 2019 issued by the State Government in exercise
of its power under Section 3 of the Commercial Courts,
Commercial Appellate Courts, Commercial Divisions and
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.3 of 2025 dt.17-04-2026
3/6
Commercial Appellate Divisions of High Courts Act, 2015
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 2015’) in consultation with
the High Court of Judicature at Patna.
6. Recently, in the case of M/s Bihar State Road
Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. M/s M.G Contractors (P)
Ltd. in Commercial Appeal No. 10 of 2024, this Court had
occasion to consider this aspect of the matter once again. Upon
discussing the entire submissions and the provisions of law as also
the provisions of the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act,
1887 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1887’), this Court has
held that the District Judge who has been constituted as a
Commercial Court within the meaning of the Act of 2015 does not
derive any power to further transfer its adjudicatory power as a
Commercial Court to the Additional Judges. We reproduce
paragraphs ‘32’ to ‘37’ of the judgment in case of M/s Bihar State
Road Development Corporation (supra) hereunder for a ready
reference:-
“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
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.3 of 2025 dt.17-04-2026
4/6
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] Government
may, 3[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 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
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.3 of 2025 dt.17-04-2026
5/6
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 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.”
7. Learned counsel for the parties are aware of the
judgments on this point and they have at the outset submitted that
this case would be covered by the judgment of this Court in case
of M/s Bihar State Road Development Corporation (supra).
8. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we set aside the
impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-
VIII, Civil Court, Patna and remit the matter to the court of learned
Principal District Judge, Patna.
Patna High Court COMMERCIAL APP No.3 of 2025 dt.17-04-2026
6/6
9. The learned Principal District Judge, Patna shall
consider the application under Section 34 of the Act of 1996 on its
own merit and shall pass a judgment/order within a reasonable
period.
10. Let a copy of this judgment together with the records
of the learned court below and the Arbitral Tribunal records be
sent down to the court of learned Principal District Judge, Patna at
the earliest.
11. This appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
lekhi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 18.04.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.