The National Small Industries Corpn. ... vs M/S. Bhanot Engineering Works on 22 February, 1991
The question with regard to the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court had also been raised in view of the fact that the value for the purposes of jurisdiction is stated to be Rs. 61,513.47 only. However, there is no serious dispute in this regard because initially the arbitrators were appointed by this Court. Therefore, this Court is seized of the matter for all further proceedings. Mr. Saluja has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Dr. D.R. Malhotra v. Indian Aluminium Cables, reported in 1978, RLR 43 in support of his contention that this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Since Mr. Chaudhary does not dispute the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the petition, it is, not necessary to deal with this point any further.