T.Mariappan vs K.Kumaran
2024 Latest Caselaw 20922 Mad

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 20922 Mad
Judgement Date : 4 November, 2024

Madras High Court

T.Mariappan vs K.Kumaran on 4 November, 2024

Author: N.Sathish Kumar

Bench: N.Sathish Kumar

                                                                                      C.R.P.No.790 of 2023
                                                                                 and C.M.P.No.6076 of 2023

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      Dated : 04.11.2024

                                                           CORAM

                                     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

                                                     C.R.P.No.790 of 2023
                                                  and C.M.P.No.6076 of 2023

                     1.T.Mariappan
                     2.M.Mythili                                                  .. Petitioners

                                                               Vs.

                     K.Kumaran                                                           ..
                     Respondent

                     Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil
                     Procedure, against the order and decreetal order dated 18.11.2022 passed in
                     I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.76 of 2017 on the file of III-Additional District
                     Judge, Tiruvallur at Poonamallee dismissing the petition under Section 8(1)
                     of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.


                                             For Petitioner      : M/s.B.Asvini
                                             For Respondents     : Mr.M.V.Sivachari


                                                          ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

decreetal order dated 18.11.2022 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.76

of 2017 on the file of III-Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur at

Poonamallee dismissing the petition under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration

and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2.The case of the petitioners is that the suit has been filed by the

respondent in O.S.No.76 of 2017 on the file of the III Additional District

Court, Poonamallee for recovery of sum of Rs.43,20,000/-. The petitioners

being the defendants contested the suit and filed the written statement.

Thereafter, the petitioners filed an application under Section 8(1) of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act. However, the same came to be dismissed.

Hence, the present application has been filed.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that only at the

time of cross-examination of P.Ws.1 and 2, the petitioners came to know

that there is an arbitration clause in the joint venture agreement and

therefore, they filed an application seeking direction to refer the matter to the

arbitration. However, the Court below after considering the application

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

dismissed the same. Hence, he prayed to set aside the order dated

18.11.2022 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.76 of 2017 on the file of

III-Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the

Court below after considering the application filed by the petitioners has

rightly dismissed the same, which does not requires any interference and he

prayed for the dismissal of the present petition.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as

the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6.For better appreciation Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996, is extracted hereunder:

“A judicial authority, before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall, if a party to the arbitration agreement or any person claiming through or under him, so applies not later than the date of submitting his

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

first statement on the substance of the dispute, then, notwithstanding, any judgment, decree or order of the Supreme Court or any Court, refer the parties to arbitration unless it finds

that prima facie no valid arbitration agreement exists.”

7.From the above provision, it clear that the parties to the arbitration

agreement cannot seek arbitration under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, after filing a written statement. At the outset, the present

Revision Petition itself is not maintainable. The petitioners ought to have

exercised the arbitration clause before filing the written statement, which has

not been done so. At the final stage of the proceedings, the matter cannot be

referred to arbitration.

8.In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed.

No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

04.11.2024

rst

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No