JUDGMENT The Order passed in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of Misc.Appeal No. 402 of 1986, between the same parties. The present appeal is against the order dated 13.8.1986 passed by Shri P.N .S. Chouhan, the then District Judge, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 20-B of 1985 holding that after the constitution of Arbitration Tribunal under the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam 1983 (Act No. 29 of 1983), the jurisdiction on the Civil Court is barred under sub-section (2) of section 20 of the said Adhiniyam. In the present case the application under section 20 of the Arbitrtion Act, 1940 was filed by the appellant before the Court of District Judge, Raipur on 25.2.1985 praying for directing the respondents to file agreement in the Court and appoint an Arbitrator as named in the Arbitration Clause in agreement for adjudication of the disputes. In appeal No. 402/86, which is also filed by the same appellant against the same set of respondents, the application before the District Judge was filed on 25.2.1985. The learned District Judge relying on sub-section (2) of section 20 of the M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam'), held that Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain such application after the formation of Arbitration Tribunal under the Adhiniyam. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that since the application was already pending before the Arbitration Tribunal with constituted, the Civil Court does not loose the jurisdiction and the order pleased by the lower Court needs to be set aside. Earlier the view of this Court was the same as held by the learned District Judge but in Misc. Appeal No. 330 of 1990 (State of M.P. & 2 others v. M/s. Chahal & Company, New Delhi) similar question was raised before the Division Bench consisting of myself and Hon'ble Shri Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari wherein considering all the views taken by this Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court in M/s. Vijayawa Transport v. A.P. State C.S. Corpn. Appeal No. 330 of 1990 (State of M.P. & 2 others v. M/s. Chahal & Company, New Delhi) similar question was raised before the Division Bench consisting of myself and Hon'ble Shri Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari wherein considering all the views taken by this Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court in M/s. Vijayawa Transport v. A.P. State C.S. Corpn. Ltd. (A.I.R. 1983 AP 172) we referred this matter to settle this important question of law by the Full Bench by our order dated 25.11.1991 as to "whether an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act pending in the Civil Court prior to the date of Constitution of the Arbitration Tribunal i.e. 1-3-1985 would be saved by the provisions of section 20 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 ?" Reference has now been decided by the Full Bench on 7.2.1992 answering the question in the affirmative thus holding that the cognizance of Civil Court in the cases pending before the Constitution of Arbitration Tribunal on 1.3.1985 are saved. Full Bench has held as under :- "On the express language of the statute, it would bear repetition, it must be held that the view taken by Dharmadhikari and Issrani n. with respect, is the correct view and the interpretation put upon the language of sub-section (2) of section 20 of the Adhiniyam by the Bench consisting of B.C. Varma J. as he then was, and Rampal Singh, does not lay down the correct position in law." In view of the decision by the Full Bench, now the matter stal1ds settled that an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 pending in the Civil Court prior to the constitution of the Arbitration Tribunal on 1.3.1985 is saved by the provisions of section 20 (2) of the Adhiniyam, 1983. This position cannot be disputed by the learned counsel for the State-respondent. Consequently, the appeal stands allowed. The case is remanded back to the lower Court for taking further proceedings and the decision in the matter according to law. However, there shall be no order as to costs.