Monporte Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs Harveen Bali & Ors.
1999 Latest Caselaw 1205 Del

ORDER

I.A. No. 10564/98 in S. No. 968/97

1. This is an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Concili- ation Act, 1996 praying for the stay of the proceedings and referring the matter to arbitration.

2. The suit is for the recovery of Rs. 38,20,184/-. Learned Counsel for the plaintiff has relied on Hindustan Copper Ltd., Jhunjhunu Vs. Assam Bearing Agencies, in which a learned Single Judge of this Court, after duly considering of the previous decisions on the sub- ject, held that if the applicant was neglected to spell out in detail the claims which in its contention, had arisen between the parties recourse could not be had to the Arbitration Clause. The learned Single Judge relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Ltd., , in which it was observed:

"With regard to the question whether a dispute of this type i.e. non-payment of price of goods is a referable dispute, the judg- ment of Shah, J. as he then was in the Supreme Court in the case just cited above, is very plain and states that the non-payment of price is not a dispute under or arising out of contract. As I have said a dispute or difference requires the statement of a proposition and a denial thereof by the other side. As the existence of such a dispute or difference is not alleged or proved or even pointed out from any documentary material or contemporary dealings between the parties, I came to the conclusion that this suit cannot be stayed and I accordingly reject the application for stay with costs."

3. Faced with this precedent learned Counsel for the applicant submits that these decisions had been rendered in the context of the Arbitration Act, 1940, and would not be relevant since the present application has been preferred under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It is no longer res integra that the provisions of Section 8 of the 1996 Act are pari materia to the provisions contained under Section 34 of the 1940 Act. The decision cited before me applies to the present case on all fours. Accordingly, the application is dismissed with costs of Rs.2,000/-

S.No. 968/97:

4. The defendant is granted six weeks' time to file his written state- ment. Replication, if any, be filed within four weeks thereafter. Within this period the parties may file their documents in original. List the matter before the Joint Registrar for admission/denial of documents on 24th April, 2000.