KMC Constructions Limited filed an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before the Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur, challenging an order of the 2nd Additional District Judge, Raipur, which had dismissed (rather than returned) the appellant's application under Section 34 of the Act seeking to set aside an arbitration award dated 18.7.2018. The lower court had found that the dispute was a commercial dispute valued at over Rs. 1 crore and therefore fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Naya Raipur, but dismissed the application on the ground that Order VII Rule 10 CPC did not permit return of an application (as opposed to a plaint). The appellant argued that dismissal instead of return was improper, as it risked loss of the original award documents and potential limitation issues if a fresh application were filed before the Commercial Court. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court decisions in Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. Samir Narain Bhojwani (2024) 7 SCC 218 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s. Tejparas Associates & Exports Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2019 SC 4785, held that although the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 contains no specific provision for return of a Section 34 application, the appellant could not be deprived of justice merely because the lower court lacked jurisdiction.