Arbitration filing authority and exclusive jurisdiction under the 1940 Act were determined by first application and prior filing.

An award filed by a party is effective only if done under the umpire's authority; a bare delivery of the original awards to the parties did not prove such authority, so filing under section 14(2) was not established. The awards were first treated as filed in the Gauhati court, because the umpire sent signed copies there earlier than the Calcutta filing, giving Gauhati jurisdiction under section 31(3). Section 31(4) was construed broadly to cover applications made before, during, and after the arbitration, including post-award filing applications, and it vested exclusive jurisdiction in the court where the first reference-related application was made.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellant had the umpire's authority to file the awards in court under section 14(2) of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940; (ii) whether the awards were first filed in the Calcutta High Court or the Gauhati court for the purpose of section 31(3); and (iii) whether section 31(4) applied only to applications made during the pendency of the arbitration or also to post-award applications.

Issue (i): Whether the appellant had the umpire's authority to file the awards in court under section 14(2) of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940.

Analysis: Section 14(2) requires the arbitrator or umpire to cause the award to be filed, and filing by a party is effective only if done under the umpire's authority. A bare handing over of the original awards to the parties did not by itself establish such authority. The record also showed no categorical pleading that the appellant was authorised to file the awards on the umpire's behalf.

Conclusion: The appellant had not proved authority to file the awards under section 14(2).

Issue (ii): Whether the awards were first filed in the Calcutta High Court or the Gauhati court for the purpose of section 31(3).

Analysis: The umpire had sent signed copies of the awards to the Gauhati court on 18 August 1949 in compliance with that court's direction, which amounted to causing the awards to be filed there by 24 August 1949. In Calcutta, the awards were treated as filed only on 29 August 1949. On those facts, the earlier filing was in Gauhati.

Conclusion: The awards were first filed in the Gauhati court, and that court had jurisdiction under section 31(3).

Issue (iii): Whether section 31(4) applied only to applications made during the pendency of the arbitration or also to post-award applications.

Analysis: Section 31 was construed as a scheme to centralise all matters connected with a reference before one court. The phrase "in any reference" was read as meaning in the matter of a reference, not merely during the course of pending arbitral proceedings. The provision therefore covered applications made before, during, and after the arbitration, including applications for filing an award.

Conclusion: Section 31(4) applies to post-award applications as well and gives exclusive jurisdiction to the court in which the first application was made.

Final Conclusion: The Gauhati court alone had jurisdiction over the dispute, and the appeals failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, an award must be filed by or under the authority of the umpire, and the court where the first application connected with the reference is made acquires exclusive jurisdiction for all subsequent applications relating to that reference.

---