HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 No. - 252 of 2022 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Shri Mohit Behari Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The instant appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 18.07.2022 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Hapur in Misc. Case No. 63 of 2018. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant had taken loan of Rs. 80 lacs from the respondent after executing an agreement dated 21.05.2013 as security to sell plot nos. 588 & 590 measuring an area 4864.50 square meters situated in Village - Parsaun, Tehsil - Dhaulana, District - Hapur. The appellant repaid the loan amount of Rs. 45 lacs on different dates. He further submits that the respondent got an Arbitrator appointed without informing the appellant and an ex parte award was passed on 15.10.2016. The appellant got to know about the ex parte award when execution proceedings were initiated by the respondent and therefore, challenged the award dated 15.10.2016 by filing Misc. Case No. 63 of 2018, which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 18.07.2022. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that during the pendency of the appeal, Commercial Courts were established pursuant to the notification dated 31.10.2017; whereby, amongst other, Commercial Court at Gautam Buddha Nagar was established having jurisdiction over Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Mohit Behari Mathur Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashok Kumar Singh, Dheeraj Kumar Singh, Smt Rekha Singh Mohd. Haneef .....Appellant(s) Phool Kumar .....Respondent(s) the Districts - Hapur, Gautam Buddha Nagar and Ghaziabad. He further submits that after establishment of the Commercial Court at Gautam Buddha Nagar, the matter ought to have been transferred to there, instead of deciding the same and therefore, the impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the records. 7. Perusal of the record shows that after establishment of the Commercial Court vide notification dated 31.10.2017, Civil Court has no jurisdiction to hear and decide the impugned proceedings. Commercial Court at Gautam Buddha Nagar was established having jurisdiction over the Districts - Hapur, Gautam Buddha Nagar and Ghaziabad and therefore, the matter ought to have been transferred to Gautam Buddha Nagar, instead of passing the impugned order. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts & circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 18.07.2022 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Hapur in Misc. Case No. 63 of 2018 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as the same has been passed without jurisdiction. The same is hereby set aside. 9. The matter is remanded to the Commercial Court at Gautam Buddha Nagar for deciding the issue afresh. 10. The lower court records be returned back within a period of 15 days from today. October 9, 2025 Amit Mishra ARPL No. 252 of 2022 2 (Piyush Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad