JUDGMENT M.R. Verma, J.—This order shall dispose of the question as to whether this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain this application under Sections 14(2) and 17 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereafter referred to as the Act’). 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant records. 3. It is not in dispute that on an application under Section 20 of the Act made by the claimant, the learned Senior Sub Judge, Solan after complying with the due procedure allowed the application and referred the dispute between the parties to the Arbitrator vide his order dated 8.1.1998. The Arbitrator has made the award. Hence, this application has been moved by the claimant under Sections 14(2) and 17 of the Act praying for directing the Arbitrator to file the original award dated 22.7.1999 in the Court together with all connected record and documents and issue of notice by this Court to the parties regarding filing of award and affording opportunity to them to file objections, if any, against the award. 4. As already noticed hereinabove, the dispute between the parties was referred to the Arbitrator by the learned Senior Sub Judge, Solan in exercise of the powers under Section 20 of the Act. The question, therefore, arose whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present application. On a combined reading of Sections 14, 17 and 31 of the Act, it is clear that once an application for referring the dispute between the parties to the Arbitrator has been entertained and allowed by a particular Court all subsequent applications under the Act arising out of such reference shall be made only to such Court. Section 31 of the Act specifically excludes the jurisdiction of any other Court to entertain such subsequent applications. 5. In view of the above position in law, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present application which could be entertained only by the Court which allowed the application under Section 20 of the Act and referred the dispute to the Arbitrator. 6. As a result, this application is ordered to be returned to the applicant for being presented to the Court having jurisdiction to entertain it in view of the above observations. The matter stands disposed of in terms of the above order. Application returned.