M/S Iffco Kisan Finance Ltd vs M/S Preet Tractors Pvt Ltd And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 5710 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S Iffco Kisan Finance Ltd vs M/S Preet Tractors Pvt Ltd And Anr on 13 March, 2024

Author: Suvir Sehgal

Bench: Suvir Sehgal

                                                       Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035954




                            Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC: 035954

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                          CHANDIGARH

271                                        CR-1934-2023 (O&M)
                                           Date of Decision:13.03.2024
M/S IFFCO KISAN FINANCE LTD


                                                             ..... Petitioner
                                           Vs


M/S PREET TRACTORS PVT LTD AND ANR

                                      ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL

Present:     Mr. Animesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the respondents.

                                 ***

SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)

1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India assailing impugned ex-parte interim order dated

23.02.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional District Judge,

Patiala on an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation

Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') vide which the petitioner has been restrained

from encashing the bank guarantee etc. and from initiating recovery

proceedings against respondent No.1.

2. Counsel for respondent No.1 has placed on record copy of order

dated 02.05.2023 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge,

Patiala. A statement has also been made that by order dated 04.03.2024, the

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035954

CR-1934-2023 (O&M) -2-

High Court of Delhi, on a petition filed by respondent No.1, under Section 11

of the Act has appointed a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the

parties. It has been submitted that sole Arbitrator has not entered upon the

reference.

3. When confronted with the arbitration clause as well as the

judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swastik Gases Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Indian Oil Corporation Limited, (2013) 9 Supreme Court Cases 32 and B.E.

Simoese Von Staraburg Niedenthal and another Versus Chhattisgarh

Investment Limited, (2015)12 Supreme Court Cases 225, counsel for

respondent No.1 could not dispute that court at Patiala did not have the

jurisdiction to entertain the petition under Section 9 of the Act. However, he

submits that interim orders passed by the Court of learned Additional District

Judge, Patiala may be kept in operation till the time respondent No.1 moves an

appropriate application before the Arbitrator who is yet to make the statutory

delcaration. This prayer has not been opposed by counsel for the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, petition is disposed of with liberty to

respondent No.1 to move an appropriate application before the Arbitrator

within a period of two months of his entering upon the reference. Interim

orders passed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala shall remain in

operation till such time.

13.03.2024                                 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
pooja saini                                      JUDGE

        Whether Speaking/Reasoned                 Yes/No
        Whether Reportable                        Yes/No


                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035954

                                  2 of 2