JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusREGISTRAR (GENERAL), ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK & ORS

800                      [2022]REPORTS
               SUPREME COURT   15 S.C.R. 800               [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A                  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. & ORS.
                                        v.
             REGISTRAR (GENERAL), ORISSA HIGH COURT,
                         CUTTACK & ORS.
B                        (Civil Appeal No. 6876 of 2022)
                              OCTOBER 19, 2022
               [M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
             Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – ss.3, 10, 15, 21, 30 –
      Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.2(1)(e) – Odisha Civil
C
      Courts Act, 1984 – ss.3, 9 – Whether in exercise of powers u/s.3 of
      the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the State Government can confer
      jurisdiction to hear applications u/ss. 9, 14 and 34 of the Arbitration
      Act, 1996, upon Commercial Courts which are subordinate to the
      rank of the Principal Civil Judge in the District, contrary to the
D     provisions of s.2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act – Held: Objects and
      Reasons of the 2015 Act is to provide for speedy disposal of the
      commercial disputes which includes the arbitration proceedings –
      Legislature in its wisdom has specifically conferred the jurisdiction
      in respect of arbitration matters as per s.10 of the 2015 Act – When
      the 2015 Act was been enacted, more particularly ss.3 & 10, there
E
      was already a provision in s.2(1)(e) of the 1996 Act – As per settled
      position of law, it is to be presumed that while enacting the
      subsequent law, the legislature is conscious of the provisions of the
      Act prior in time and therefore the later Act shall prevail – Even as
      per s.15 of the 2015 Act, all suits and applications including
F     applications under the 1996 Act, relating to a commercial dispute
      of specified value shall have to be transferred to the Commercial
      Court – Further, as per s.21 of the 2015 Act, the 2015 Act shall
      have overriding effect – Thus, ss.3 & 10 of the 2015 Act shall prevail
      and all applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under the
      provisions of the 1996 Act, other than international commercial
G
      arbitration, shall be filed in and heard and disposed of by the
      Commercial Courts, exercising the territorial jurisdiction over such
      arbitration where such commercial courts have been constituted –
      In the present case, notification issued by the State of Odisha in
      consultation with the High Court of Orissa to confer jurisdiction
H     upon the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) designated as
                                        800
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                     801
           ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

Commercial Court to decide the applications or appeals arising out     A
of arbitration under the provisions of the 1996 Act, cannot be said
to be illegal and bad in law – It is in consonance with ss.3 & 10 of
the 2015 Act – View taken by the High Court is agreed with.
     Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – Object and purpose of –
Discussed.                                                             B
      Dismissing the appeals, the Court
      HELD: 1.1 In the year 2003, the Law Commission of India
suo moto took up the issue of constitution of Commercial
Divisions in the High Courts with a view to facilitate fast disposal
of high value commercial disputes. In its 188th Report, the Law        C
Commission, after carrying out in-depth study of Commercial
Courts in United Kingdom, USA, Singapore etc. recommended
setting up of Commercial Division in each of the High Courts to
expedite commercial cases of high pecuniary value. On the basis
of the recommendations of the Law Commission, a Bill was               D
introduced in Lok Sabha on 16.12.2009 and passed on 18.12.2009
for setting up commercial divisions in the High Courts. The Bill
was referred to a Select Committee which suggested certain
amendments to the said Bill. The Bill was redrafted and placed
before the Rajya Sabha for its consideration. However, the same
came to be withdrawn by the Government and thereafter the              E
matter was again referred to the Law Commission for its report.
The Law Commission in its 253rd Report submitted in January,
2015 suggested a new approach for expediting commercial
disputes and therefore proposed a new Bill. Accordingly,
Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial                  F
Appellate Division of High Courts Bill, 2015 was introduced in
Rajya Sabha on April 29, 2015 which was referred to Departmental
Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public
Grievances, Law and Justice. While the matter was pending before
the Parliamentary Committee, an Ordinance was promulgated
by His Excellency the President of India on 23.10.2015, namely,        G
Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial
Appellate Division of High Courts Ordinance, 2015. That
thereafter, the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 was
passed by the Parliament, which has been subsequently re-named         H
802            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A     as Commercial Courts Act, 2015. That thereafter the Commercial
      Courts Act, 2015 has been amended in the year 2018 which has
      come into force with effect from 03.05.2018, by which Sections
      3(1A) & 3A have been inserted enabling the State Governments
      to designate such number of commercial Appellate Courts at
      District level to exercise appellate jurisdiction over the
B
      commercial courts below the District Judge level. Thus, a
      commercial Court can be set up under Section 3 of the Act, 2015
      and a commercial appellate Court can be set up under Section
      3A of the Act, 2015. [Paras 9.1-9.2][813-C-F; 814-C-E, G-H; 815-
      A]
C           1.2 Thus, the Objects and Reasons of Commercial Courts
      Act, 2015 is to provide for speedy disposal of the commercial
      disputes which includes the arbitration proceedings. To achieve
      the said Objects, the legislature in its wisdom has specifically
      conferred the jurisdiction in respect of arbitration matters as per
D     Section 10 of the Act, 2015. The Act, 2015 is the Act later in time
      and therefore when the Act, 2015 has been enacted, more
      particularly Sections 3 & 10, there was already a provision
      contained in Section 2(1)(e) of the Act, 1996. As per settled
      position of law, it is to be presumed that while enacting the
      subsequent law, the legislature is conscious of the provisions of
E     the Act prior in time and therefore the later Act shall prevail.
      Even as per Section 15 of the Act, 2015, all suits and applications
      including applications under the Act, 1996, relating to a
      commercial dispute of specified value shall have to be transferred
      to the Commercial Court. Even as per Section 21 of the Act,
F     2015, Act, 2015 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. [Para 10][815-B-E]
            1.3 Therefore, considering the afore-stated provisions of
G     the Act, 2015 and the Objects and Reasons for which the Act,
      2015 has been enacted and the Commercial Courts, Commercial
      Division and Commercial Appellate Division in the High Courts
      are established for speedy disposal of the commercial disputes
      including the arbitration disputes, Sections 3 & 10 of the Act,
      2015 shall prevail and all applications or appeals arising out of
H
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                       803
           ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996, other than                A
international commercial arbitration, shall be filed in and heard
and disposed of by the Commercial Courts, exercising the
territorial jurisdiction over such arbitration where such
commercial courts have been constituted. If the submission on
behalf of the appellants that all applications/appeals arising out of
                                                                         B
arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996, other than the
international commercial arbitration, shall lie before the principal
civil Court of a district, in that case, not only the Objects and
Reasons of enactment of Act, 2015 and establishment of
commercial courts shall be frustrated, even Sections 3, 10 & 15
shall become otiose and nugatory. If the submission on behalf of         C
the appellants is accepted, in that case, though with respect to
other commercial disputes, the applications or appeals shall lie
before the commercial courts established and constituted under
Section 3 of Act, 2015, with respect to arbitration proceedings,
the applications or appeals shall lie before the principal civil Court
                                                                         D
of a district. There cannot be two fora with respect to different
commercial disputes. Under the circumstances, notification issued
by the State of Odisha issued in consultation with the High Court
of Orissa to confer jurisdiction upon the court of learned Civil
Judge (Senior Division) designated as Commercial Court to
decide the applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under      E
the provisions of Act, 1996 cannot be said to be illegal and bad in
law. On the contrary, the same can be said to be absolutely in
consonance with Sections 3 & 10 of Act, 2015. This Court is in
complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court
holding so. [Para 11][815-E-H; 816-A-D]
                                                                         F
      State of Maharashtra and Anr. Vs. Atlanata Ltd. (2014)
      11 SCC 619 : [2014] 1 SCR 507; State of West Bengal
      and Ors. v. Associated Contractors (2015) 1 SCC 32 :
      [2014] 10 SCR 426; Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. v. Jindal
      Exports Ltd. (2011) 8 SCC 333 : [2011] 11 SCR 1;
      Kandla Export Corporation and Anr. v. OCI                          G
      Corporation and Anr. (2018) 14 SCC 715 : [2018] 1
      SCR 915; BGS SGS SOMA JV v. NHPC Ltd. (2020) 4
      SCC 234 – referred to.

                                                                         H
804             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A                              Case Law Reference
      [2014] 1 SCR 507                     referred to            Para 3.3
      [2014] 10 SCR 426                    referred to            Para 3.3
      [2011] 11 SCR 1                      referred to            Para 3.4
B     [2018] 1 SCR 915                     referred to            Para 3.4
            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6876
      of 2022.
            From the Judgment and Order dated 12.04.2022 of the High Court
      of Orissa at Cuttack in WP (C) No. 31939 of 2021.
C
            With
            Civil Appeal Nos. 6878 and 6877 of 2022.
            Gaurav Aggarwal, (Amicus Curiae)
D           Ms. Uttara Babbar, Adv. for the Appellants.
            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
            M. R. SHAH, J.
             1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common
      judgment and order dated 12.04.2022 passed by the High Court of Orissa
E
      at Cuttack in respective writ petitions, by which, the Division Bench of
      the High Court has dismissed the respective writ petitions in which the
      appellants herein – original writ petitioners challenged a notification dated
      13.11.2020, issued by the State of Odisha through its Principal Secretary,
      Law Department in establishing the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior
F     Division) as Commercial Courts for the purposes of exercising jurisdiction
      and powers under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the original writ
      petitioners have preferred the present appeals.
             2. In exercise of powers conferred by Section 3 and sub-section
      (1) of Section 9 read with Section 10 of the Odisha Civil Courts Act,
G     1984 and Section 30 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (hereinafter
      referred to as the Act, 2015), the State Government on the
      recommendation of and after consultation with the High Court of Orissa
      has established the Courts of Civil Judge (Senior Division) as Commercial
      Courts for the purposes of exercising the jurisdiction and powers under
      the Act, 2015.
H
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                                 805
     ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

       2.1 The original writ petitioners – appellants herein initially filed       A
the proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Arbitration Act, 1996) in the
Court of learned District Judge. However, on establishment of the
Commercial Courts under the aforesaid notification, the said proceedings
were transferred to the Commercial Court i.e., the Court of Civil Judge
                                                                                   B
(Senior Division) [designated as Commercial Court]. Therefore, the
appellants herein challenged the aforesaid notification and designating
the Courts of Civil Judge (Senior Division) as Commercial Courts under
the Act, 2015 before the High Court by way of present writ petitions. It
was the case on behalf of the appellants – original writ petitioners that
constituting and/or designating the Courts of Civil Judge (Senior Division)        C
as Commercial Courts and to exercise the powers under the Commercial
Courts Act would be in conflict with the provisions of Section 2(1)(e) of
the Arbitration Act, 1996. It was the case on behalf of the appellants
herein that under Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996, only the
Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district (Court of Principal
                                                                                   D
District Judge) shall be the “Court” for the purpose of deciding the disputes
under the Arbitration Act, 1996 and in case of an arbitration it does not
include any Civil Court of a grade inferior to such Principal District
Judge. Therefore, it was the case on behalf of the appellants that to
confer the jurisdiction upon the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) to
exercise the powers under the Commercial Courts Act including the                  E
proceedings under the Arbitration Act, 1996 would be contrary to Section
2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996, which is the Special Act. By the
impugned common judgment and order the High Court has dismissed
the said writ petitions which has given rise to the present appeals.
       3. Ms. Uttara Babbar, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of             F
the respective appellants – original writ petitioners and Shri Gaurav
Aggarwal, learned counsel has appeared as Amicus Curiae appointed
by the Court.
       3.1 Ms. Babbar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants has vehemently submitted that there is a conflict between               G
Section 3 of the Act, 2015 and Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act,
1996. It is submitted that Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996
provides that the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a district
shall be the “Court” in the case of an arbitration other than international
commercial arbitration. It is submitted that Section 2(1)(e) of the
                                                                                   H
806             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A     Arbitration Act, 1996 specifically provides that it does not include any
      Civil Court of a grade inferior to such Principal Civil Court. It is submitted
      that therefore, under Section 2(1)(e)(i) of the Arbitration Act, 1996, all
      courts inferior to Principal Civil Court are excluded. It is submitted that
      wherever an application has to lie to a “court” (under the Commercial
      Courts Act), it must lie to the Principal Civil Court and the jurisdiction of
B
      all inferior courts is excluded.
             3.2 It is submitted that when in exercise of the powers under
      Section 3 of the Act, 2015, jurisdiction to hear applications under Sections
      9, 14, 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, is conferred on commercial courts
      which are subordinate to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction
C     in the district, there is a clear conflict with the provisions of Section
      2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996.
             3.3 It is further submitted by Ms. Babbar, learned counsel
      appearing on behalf of the appellants that the “Court” under Section
      2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is the superior most court in the
D     district and as such legislature intended to minimize the supervisory role
      of the courts in the arbitral process. Reliance is placed on the decisions
      of this Court in the cases of State of Maharashtra and Anr. Vs.
      Atlanata Ltd.; (2014) 11 SCC 619 and State of West Bengal and
      Ors. Vs. Associated Contractors; (2015) 1 SCC 32.
E           3.4 It is further submitted by Ms. Babbar, learned counsel
      appearing on behalf of the appellants that the Arbitration and Conciliation
      Act, being a special statute vis-à-vis the Commercial Courts Act, shall
      prevail over the Commercial Courts Act in the case of any conflict as
      held by this Court in the cases of Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. Vs. Jindal
F     Exports Ltd.; (2011) 8 SCC 333 and Kandla Export Corporation
      and Anr. Vs. OCI Corporation and Anr.; (2018) 14 SCC 715, the
      Arbitration and Conciliation Act shall prevail.
             3.5 It is further submitted that the High Court has proceeded on
      an erroneous premise that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act must yield
G     to the Commercial Courts Act as both are special statutes, and the
      Commercial Courts Act is the later statute. It is submitted that aforesaid
      is contrary to the aforesaid two decisions of this Court. It is submitted
      that as observed and held by this Court in the case of Fuerst Day
      Lawson Ltd. (supra) the Arbitration Act is a self-contained code and
      exhaustive and therefore, the same shall prevail over the Commercial
H     Courts Act being a Special Act. It is further submitted that the decision
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                            807
     ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

of this Court in the case of Kandla Export Corporation (supra) has            A
been subsequently approved by a bench of three Hon’ble Judges in the
case of BGS SGS SOMA JV Vs. NHPC Ltd.; (2020) 4 SCC 234. It
is submitted that in the said decision, this Court has categorically held
that the Arbitration Act is a complete code and a Special Act which
excludes the general law, including the Commercial Courts Act. It is
                                                                              B
submitted that therefore the view taken by the High Court in the common
impugned judgment and order is just contrary to the decision of this
Court in the case of Kandla Exports Corporation (supra) and another
decision referred hereinabove.
       3.6 It is further submitted by Ms. Babbar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants that the objective of the Arbitration   C
Act is to ensure speedy disposal of cases which minimal court’s
interference. If the Civil Judge (Senior Division) is designated as
Commercial Court, then the litigant would be provided another challenge
to the High Court under Article 227 even after disposal of the appeal by
the District Judge, which shall defeat the objective of speedy disposal.      D
Reliance is placed on para 27 of the decision of this Court in the case of
Kandla Exports Corporation (supra).
      3.7 Ms. Babbar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants has pointed that there is a conflict in the views of various
High Courts. It is submitted that the Gujarat High Court and the Madhya       E
Pradesh High Court have taken the view that the Arbitration Act will
prevail over the Commercial Courts Act and on other hand the Bombay
High Court, Rajasthan High Court and Orissa High Court have taken a
contrary view.
       3.8 Making the above submissions and relying upon the above            F
decisions, it is prayed to declare and hold that the notification issued by
the State of Odisha conferring the powers upon the Commercial Court
– Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) to exercise the powers under
the Commercial Courts Act in respect of arbitration disputes as illegal,
bad in law and consequently to quash and set aside the impugned common
judgment and order passed by the High Court.                                  G
      4. Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned counsel and Amicus Curiae
has taken us to the object and purpose of enactment of Commercial
Courts Act and establishment of the Commercial Courts, Commercial
Division and Commercial Appellate Division of the High Court. It is
submitted that the Commercial Courts Act and the establishment of             H
808             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                            [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A     Commercial Courts are with a view to facilitate early disposal of the
      high value disputes/commercial disputes. It is submitted that with a view
      to achieving the object of speedy disposal of the commercial disputes,
      the legislature has enacted the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It is
      submitted that under Section 3 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, a
      commercial Court can be set up and a commercial Appellate Court can
B
      be set up under Section 3A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It is
      submitted that a dispute relating to arbitration is a commercial dispute
      under Section 2(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It is submitted
      that Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is a special provision
      in respect of arbitration matters. It is submitted that as per sub-section
C     (3) of Section 10, if the arbitration is other than an international commercial
      arbitration, all applications or appeals arising out of such arbitration under
      the provisions of the Arbitration Act that would ordinarily lie before any
      principal civil court of original jurisdiction in a district, shall be filed in,
      and heard and disposed of by the Commercial Court exercising territorial
      jurisdiction over such arbitration where such Commercial Court has been
D
      constituted. It is submitted that the Commercial Courts Act – being a
      later Act and has been enacted for a specific purpose for speedy disposal
      of the commercial disputes, the same shall prevail. It is submitted that
      when the legislature in its wisdom in a later enactment has specifically
      provided as per sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Commercial Courts
E     Act, 2015 that all applications/appeals arising out of the Arbitration Act
      other than the international commercial arbitration would be heard and
      disposed of by the Commercial Court, the same shall prevail. It is submitted
      that if the submissions made on behalf of the appellants is accepted in
      that case Section 10 would become otiose or redundant and/or nugatory.
      It is submitted that therefore, it is requested not to have the interpretation
F
      which shall result any provision of the Act nugatory and/or otiose.
              4.1 Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of this
      Court in the case of Kandla Export Corporation (supra) is concerned,
      it is vehemently submitted that the said decision does not imply that all
      provisions of the Arbitration Act would prevail over the Commercial
G     Courts in case of any conflict and inconsistency.
             4.2 It is submitted that similarly the decision of this Court in the
      case of BGS SGS SOMA JV (supra) shall not be applicable to the
      facts of the case on hand, it is submitted that in the said decision it is held

H
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                               809
     ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

that Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts Act does not provide for             A
independent right of appeal, but merely provides forum of filing appeal.
       4.3 Making the above submissions it is prayed to dismiss the present
appeals and hold that in the present case the notification issued by the
State Government conferring powers upon the Commercial Court – Court
of Civil Judge (Senior Division) to exercise the powers under the                B
Commercial Courts Act is neither illegal nor bad in law.
       5. We have heard Ms. Uttara Babbar, learned counsel appearing
for the appellants and Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned Amicus Curiae.
       6. The question of law arising for consideration in the present
appeal is, whether in exercise of powers under Section 3 of the                  C
Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the State Government can confer
jurisdiction to hear applications under Sections 9, 14 and 34 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, upon Commercial Courts which
are subordinate to the rank of the Principal Civil Judge in the District,
contrary to the provisions of Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act?            D
      7. While considering the aforesaid question of law, relevant
provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1996 and the Commercial Courts Act,
2015 are required to be referred to and considered, namely, Section
2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act and Sections 3, 10, 15 & 21 of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015, which read as under:                                E
      “Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration Act, 1996:
      (e) “Court” means –
      (i) in the case of an arbitration other than international commercial
      arbitration, the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in a
                                                                                 F
      district, and includes the High Court in exercise of its ordinary
      original civil jurisdiction, having jurisdiction to decide the questions
      forming the subject-matter of the arbitration if the same had been
      the subject-matter of a suit, but does not include any Civil Court
      of a grade inferior to such principal Civil Court, or any Court of
      Small Causes;                                                              G
      (ii) in the case of international commercial arbitration, the High
      Court in exercise of its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, having
      jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the subject-matter of
      the arbitration if the same had been the subject-matter of a suit,
                                                                                 H
810      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A     and in other cases, a High Court having jurisdiction to hear appears
      from decrees of courts subordinate to that High Court”
      Sections 3, 10, 15 & 21 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015:
      3. Constitution of Commercial Courts - (1) The State
      Government, may after consultation with the concerned High Court,
B     by notification, constitute such number of Commercial Courts at
      District level, as it may deem necessary for the purpose of
      exercising the jurisdiction and powers conferred on those courts
      under this Act:
      Provided that with respect to the High Courts having ordinary
C     original civil jurisdiction, the State Government may, after
      consultation with the concerned High Court, by notification,
      constitute Commercial Courts at the District Judge level:
      Provided further that with respect to a territory over which the
      High Courts have ordinary original civil jurisdiction, the State
D     Government may, by notification, specify such pecuniary value
      which shall not be less than three lakh rupees and not more than
      the pecuniary jurisdiction exercisable by the District Courts, as it
      may consider necessary.]
      (1-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the State
E     Government may, after consultation with the concerned High Court,
      by notification, specify such pecuniary value which shall not be
      less than three lakh rupees or such higher value, for whole or part
      of the State, as it may consider necessary.]
      (2) The State Government shall, after consultation, with the
F     concerned High Court specify, by notification, the local limits of
      the area to which the jurisdiction of a Commercial Court shall
      extend and may, from time to time, increase, reduce or alter such
      limits.
      (3) The [State Government may], with the concurrence of the
G     Chief Justice of the High Court appoint one or more persons having
      experience in dealing with commercial disputes to be the Judge or
      Judges, of a [Commercial Court either at the level of District Judge
      or a court below the level of a District Judge].
      10. Jurisdiction in respect of arbitration matters - Where
H     the subject-matter of an arbitration is a commercial dispute
      of a specified value and—
JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                             811
   ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

  (1) If such arbitration is an international commercial arbitration,        A
  all applications or appeals arising out of such arbitration under the
  provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of
  1996) that have been filed in a High Court, shall be heard and
  disposed of by the Commercial Division where such Commercial
  Division has been constituted in such High Court.
                                                                             B
  (2) If such arbitration is other than an international commercial
  arbitration, all applications or appeals arising out of such arbitration
  under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
  (26 of 1996) that have been filed on the original side of the High
  Court, shall be heard and disposed of by the Commercial Division
  where such Commercial Division has been constituted in such                C
  High Court.
  (3) If such arbitration is other than an international commercial
  arbitration, all applications or appeals arising out of such arbitration
  under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
  (26 of 1996) that would ordinarily lie before any principal civil          D
  court of original jurisdiction in a district (not being a High Court)
  shall be filed in, and heard and disposed of by the Commercial
  Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over such arbitration where
  such Commercial Court has been constituted.
  15. Transfer of Pending Cases— (1) All suits and applications,             E
  including applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
  1996 (26 of 1996), relating to a commercial dispute of a Specified
  Value pending in a High Court where a Commercial Division has
  been constituted, shall be transferred to the Commercial Division.
  (2) All suits and applications, including applications under the           F
  Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), relating to a
  commercial dispute of a specified value pending in any civil court
  in any district or area in respect of which a Commercial Court
  has been constituted, shall be transferred to such Commercial
  Court:                                                                     G
  Provided that no suit or application where the final judgment has
  been reserved by the court prior to the constitution of the
  Commercial Division or the Commercial Court shall be transferred
  either under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2).
                                                                             H
812             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A           (3) Where any suit or application, including an application under
            the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996), relating to
            a commercial dispute of specified value shall stand transferred to
            the Commercial Division or Commercial Court under sub-section
            (1) or sub-section (2), the provisions of this Act shall apply to
            those procedures that were not complete at the time of transfer.
B
            (4) The Commercial Division or Commercial Court, as the case
            may be, may hold case management hearings in respect of such
            transferred suit or application in order to prescribe new timelines
            or issue such further directions as may be necessary for a speedy
            and efficacious disposal of such suit or application in
C           accordance [with Order XV-A] of the Code of Civil Procedure,
            1908 (5 of 1908):
            Provided that the proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 1 of Order V of
            the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) shall not apply to
            such transferred suit or application and the court may, in its
D           discretion, prescribe a new time period within which the written
            statement shall be filed.
            (5) In the event that such suit or application is not transferred in
            the manner specified in sub-section (1), sub-section (2) or sub-
            section (3), the Commercial Appellate Division of the High Court
E           may, on the application of any of the parties to the suit, withdraw
            such suit or application from the court before which it is pending
            and transfer the same for trial or disposal to the Commercial
            Division or Commercial Court, as the case may be, having territorial
            jurisdiction over such suit, and such order of transfer shall be final
F           and binding.
            21 Act to have overriding effect —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 or in any instrument having effect by virtue of
G           any law for the time being in force other than this Act.”
             8. It is the case on behalf of the appellants, relying upon Section
      2(1)(e) of the Act, 1996 that in case of arbitration other than the
      international commercial arbitration, the principal Civil Court of original
      jurisdiction in a district only have the jurisdiction to decide the questions
      forming the subject-matter of the arbitration, but does not include any
H
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                            813
     ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

Civil Court of a grade inferior to such principal Civil Court, or any Court   A
of Small Causes. Therefore, it is the case on behalf of the appellants
that therefore conferring the jurisdiction upon the Court of learned Civil
Judge (Senior Division) as Commercial Court to hear applications under
Section 9, 14 and 34 of the Act, 1996 shall be directly in conflict with
Section 2(1)(e) of the Act, 1996 and therefore the notification of the
                                                                              B
State Government conferring such powers upon the Court of learned
Civil Judge (Senior Division) which is subordinate to the rank of Principal
Civil Judge in a district shall be bad in law.
       9. While considering the aforesaid issue/question, first of all, one
has to consider the object and purpose of establishment of the Commercial
Courts and the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.                  C

       9.1 In the year 2003, the Law Commission of India suo moto took
up the issue of constitution of Commercial Divisions in the High Courts
with a view to facilitate fast disposal of high value commercial disputes.
In its 188th Report, the Law Commission, after carrying out in-depth
study of Commercial Courts in United Kingdom, USA, Singapore etc.             D
recommended setting up of Commercial Division in each of the High
Courts to expedite commercial cases of high pecuniary value.
       9.2 On the basis of the above recommendations of the Law
Commission, a Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on 16.12.2009 and
passed on 18.12.2009 for setting up commercial divisions in the High          E
Courts. The Bill was referred to a Select Committee which suggested
certain amendments to the said Bill. The Bill was redrafted and placed
before the Rajya Sabha for its consideration. However, the same came
to be withdrawn by the Government and thereafter the matter was again
referred to the Law Commission for its report. The Law Commission in          F
its 253rd Report submitted in January, 2015 suggested a new approach
for expediting commercial disputes and therefore proposed a new Bill.
The Law Commission made the following recommendations qua
arbitration matters involving the commercial disputes:
      “3.24.4 Second, in the case of domestic arbitrations concerning a       G
      commercial dispute of more than Rupees One Crore, applications
      or appeals may lie either to the High Court or a Civil Court (not
      being a High Court) depending upon the pecuniary jurisdiction. It
      is recommended that all applications or appeals arising out of such
      arbitrations under the A& C Act, that have been filed on the
      original side of the High Court shall be heard by the Commercial        H
814            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A           Division of the High Court where such Commercial Division is
            constituted in the High Court. However, in the absence of a
            Commercial Division being constituted, the regular Bench of the
            High Court will hear such applications or appeals arising out of
            domestic arbitration. If the application or appeal in such domestic
            arbitration is not within the jurisdiction of the High Court and would
B
            ordinarily lie before a Civil Court (not being a High Court) and
            there is a Commercial Court exercising territorial jurisdiction in
            respect of such arbitration, then such application or appeal shall
            be filed in and heard by such Commercial Court.”
            Accordingly, Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
C     Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Bill, 2015 was introduced
      in Rajya Sabha on April 29, 2015 which was referred to Departmental
      Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public
      Grievances, Law and Justice. While the matter was pending before the
      Parliamentary Committee, an Ordinance was promulgated by His
D     Excellency the President of India on 23.10.2015, namely, Commercial
      Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High
      Courts Ordinance, 2015.
             That thereafter, the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
      Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 was passed by
E     the Parliament, which has been subsequently re-named as Commercial
      Courts Act, 2015. The statements of Objects and Reasons of the said
      Act, inter alia, provides as under:
            “The proposal to provide for speedy disposal of high value
            commercial disputes has been under consideration of the
F           Government for quite some time. The high value commercial
            disputes involve complex facts and question of law. Therefore,
            there is a need to provide for an independent mechanism for their
            early resolution. Early resolution of commercial disputes shall
            create a positive image to the investor world about the independent
            and responsive Indian legal system.”
G
             That thereafter the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 has been
      amended in the year 2018 which has come into force with effect from
      03.05.2018, by which Sections 3(1A) & 3A have been inserted enabling
      the State Governments to designate such number of commercial Appellate
      Courts at District level to exercise appellate jurisdiction over the
H
  JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. v. REGISTRAR (GENERAL),                               815
     ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK [M. R. SHAH, J.]

commercial courts below the District Judge level. Thus, a commercial             A
Court can be set up under Section 3 of the Act, 2015 and a commercial
appellate Court can be set up under Section 3A of the Act, 2015.
       10. Thus, the Objects and Reasons of Commercial Courts Act,
2015 is to provide for speedy disposal of the commercial disputes which
includes the arbitration proceedings. To achieve the said Objects, the           B
legislature in its wisdom has specifically conferred the jurisdiction in
respect of arbitration matters as per Section 10 of the Act, 2015. At this
stage, it is required to be noted that the Act, 2015 is the Act later in time
and therefore when the Act, 2015 has been enacted, more particularly
Sections 3 & 10, there was already a provision contained in Section
2(1)(e) of the Act, 1996. As per settled position of law, it is to be presumed   C
that while enacting the subsequent law, the legislature is conscious of
the provisions of the Act prior in time and therefore the later Act shall
prevail. It is also required to be noted that even as per Section 15 of the
Act, 2015, all suits and applications including applications under the Act,
1996, relating to a commercial dispute of specified value shall have to be       D
transferred to the Commercial Court. Even as per Section 21 of the Act,
2015, Act, 2015 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.
                                                                                 E
       11. Therefore, considering the afore-stated provisions of the Act,
2015 and the Objects and Reasons for which the Act, 2015 has been
enacted and the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
Commercial Appellate Division in the High Courts are established for
speedy disposal of the commercial disputes including the arbitration
disputes, Sections 3 & 10 of the Act, 2015 shall prevail and all applications    F
or appeals arising out of arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996,
other than international commercial arbitration, shall be filed in and heard
and disposed of by the Commercial Courts, exercising the territorial
jurisdiction over such arbitration where such commercial courts have
been constituted. If the submission on behalf of the appellants that all         G
applications/appeals arising out of arbitration under the provisions of Act,
1996, other than the international commercial arbitration, shall lie before
the principal civil Court of a district, in that case, not only the Objects
and Reasons of enactment of Act, 2015 and establishment of commercial
courts shall be frustrated, even Sections 3, 10 & 15 shall become otiose
                                                                                 H
816             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2022] 15 S.C.R.


A     and nugatory. If the submission on behalf of the appellants is accepted,
      in that case, though with respect to other commercial disputes, the
      applications or appeals shall lie before the commercial courts established
      and constituted under Section 3 of Act, 2015, with respect to arbitration
      proceedings, the applications or appeals shall lie before the principal civil
      Court of a district. There cannot be two fora with respect to different
B
      commercial disputes.
             Under the circumstances, notification issued by the State of Odisha
      issued in consultation with the High Court of Orissa to confer jurisdiction
      upon the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) designated as
      Commercial Court to decide the applications or appeals arising out of
C     arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996 cannot be said to be illegal
      and bad in law. On the contrary, the same can be said to be absolutely in
      consonance with Sections 3 & 10 of Act, 2015. We are in complete
      agreement with the view taken by the High Court holding so.
             12. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all
D     these appeals fail and the same deserve to be dismissed and are
      accordingly dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the
      case, there shall be no order as to costs.
             13. Before parting with the case, we appreciate the assistance
      rendered by Shri Gaurav Aggarwal, learned counsel as Amicus Curiae
E     in the matter.

      Divya Pandey                                                Appeals dismissed.
      (Assisted by : Deepak Panwar, LCRA)


F




G




H