9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t and thereby were justified in holding that the civil suit filed by the respondent was maintainable for grant of reliefs claimed in the plaint despite parties agreeing to get the disputes arising therefrom to be decided by the arbitrator. - Mr. R.K. Agrawal And Mr. Abhay Manohar Sapre JJ. JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1) Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2) This appeal is filed by the defendant against the final judgment and order dated 27.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in F.A.O. No.344 of 2016 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein and upheld the order dated 11.04.2016 of the Additional District Judge-05, South East Dist., Saket Courts, New Delhi in C.S. No. 132 of 2016. 3. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpired by efflux of time and no fresh lease deed was executed thereafter between the parties for extension of the time period. The appellant's tenancy was monthly and started from 1st of every month and ended on the last day of each month. 9. The appellant, on being served with the notice of the civil suit, filed an application under Section 8 of the Act. According to the appellant, since the suit was founded on the lease deed dated 31.08.2010, which contained an arbitration clause (9.8) for resolving the dispute arising out of the lease deed between the parties, and when admittedly the disputes had arisen in relation to the suit premises, the same were governed by the terms of the lease deed. It was contended that the civil suit to cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the Trial Court giving rise to filing of the special leave to appeal by the defendant (appellant herein) before this Court. 14. Heard Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel for the respondent. 15. Though learned senior counsel for the appellant (defendant) argued the point involved in the appeal at great length and also cited several decisions such as, Anjuman Taraqqi Urdu (Hind) vs. Vardhaman Yarns Threads Ltd. , ILR(2012) II Delhi 770, M/s Lovely Obsessions Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. M/s Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd. Gurgaon , (2012) SCC Online P H 11449, Reva Electric Car Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. Green Mobil, (2012) 2 SCC 93 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tenant was inducted pursuant to leave and license agreement executed between the landlord and the tenant. 20. The tenant filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 contending therein that since the leave and license agreement contained an arbitration clause for resolving all kinds of disputes arising between the parties in relation to the leave and license agreement and the disputes had arisen between the parties in relation to the leave and license agreement, such disputes could only be resolved by the arbitrator as agreed by the parties in the agreement. It was contended that the civil suit was, therefore, not maintainable and the disputes for which the suit has been filed be referred to the arbitrator for their a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arties being that of licensor-landlord and licensee tenant and the dispute between them relating to the possession of the licensed demised premises, there is no help from the conclusion that the Court of Small Causes alone has the jurisdiction and the arbitrator has none to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties. 23. Yet in another case of Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. (supra), this Court (two Judge Bench) speaking through R.V.Raveendran J. laid down the following proposition of law after examining the question as to which cases are arbitrable and which are non-arbitrable: 36. The well-recognised examples of non-arbitrable disputes are: (i) disputes relating to rights and liabilities which give rise to or arise out of criminal offences; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of the Act do not apply to certain premises but that does not mean that the Arbitration Act, ipso facto, would be applicable to such premises conferring jurisdiction on the arbitrator to decide the eviction/rent disputes. In such a situation, the rights of the parties and the demised premises would be governed by the Transfer of Property Act and the civil suit would be triable by the Civil Court and not by the arbitrator. In other words, though by virtue of Section 3 of the Act, the provisions of the Act are not applicable to certain premises but no sooner the exemption is withdrawn or ceased to have its application to a particular premises, the Act becomes applicable to such premises. In this view of the matter, it cannot be conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
