Mr. Bharat Bhushan Tewari vs M/S Indusind Marketing And
2023 Latest Caselaw 2930 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                      COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPMS No.1337 of 2019
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Bharat Bhushan Tewari, Advocate, for the applicant.

Mr. T.C. Pandey, Advocate, for respondents. Mr. Bharat Bhushan Tewari, Advocate, for the applicant.

Mr. T.C. Pandey, Advocate, for respondents. The plaintiff/petitioner, herein, on 25th May, 2015, has instituted a suit, being Suit No. 34 of 2015, Jasbir Singh Vs. M/s IndusInd Marketing and Financial Services and another, which was a suit for a grant of decree of recovery of an amount of Rs.2,35,200/-.

Notices were issued to the defendants, and the defendants at the first given available opportunity, has raised a plea, that the suit would not be maintainable in the light of Clause 20 of the agreement, which provided, that in an event of any dispute inter se between the parties, which is governed or arisen by the said terms of agreement, the parties would be referred to get the dispute adjudicated by the Arbitrator.

The invocation of the arbitration clause is mandatorily provided under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, which provides, that a judicial authority, before whom an action is brought by way of a suit, he has to refer the matter back to the Arbitrator, subject to the condition, that objection to the said effect is raised by the defendant "not later than submitting of the first statement on the substance of dispute".

The defendant has come up with the case, that and even as observed in the impugned order, that prior to filing of any of the statement on the merits of the suit, and rather immediately after putting an appearance, the defendant has filed the application, paper No. 27-C, contending thereof, that the suit is not maintainable because of the bar created under Section 8 of the Act of 1996.

The learned Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Haldwani, considered the said aspect, and had allowed the application, paper No. 27-C, relegating the plaintiff, to invoke the arbitration clause as agreed to be provided under para 20 of the arbitration agreement. The said judgment was affirmed in a Revision, preferred by the petitioner, being Civil Revision No. 26 of 2017, Jasbir Singh Vs. M/s IndusInd Marketing and Financial Services and another.

Since the application under Section 8 of the Act, has been concurrently decided by the Trial Court relegating the petitioner /plaintiff to invoke para 20 of the Arbitration agreement, by seeking a reference of the dispute before the Arbitrator. The specific bar which has been created by statute under Section 8 will come into play, and the impugned orders, which are challenged, cannot be said to be not in consonance to the provisions of law.

Thus, the Writ Petition lacks merits and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 03.10.2023 Shiv