9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 2022X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arai and Chayan Gupta, Advs. JUDGMENT Harish Tandon, J. 1. These two applications are taken up together arising from a common order in order to avoid the prolixity of repetition. The petitioner files two suits being CS 139 of 2010 and CS 140 of 2010 before this Court seeking declaration that they are not obliged to pay an amount under the term loan facility, the general condition supplemental a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent under Section 8 of the said Act and referred the parties to arbitration. 3. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition. The Special Leave Petition came up on 7th November, 2016 and was withdrawn by the petitioner. It was submitted before the Supreme Court that such withdrawal is made to file an application for review before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmission was advanced before the Supreme Court that the petitioner therein intended to exhaust the remedy of review on a particular ground and the same was a consideration in permitting the withdrawal of the Special Leave Petition. It is no longer res integra that the review jurisdiction is not exercised as an appellate jurisdiction where the entire issue is at large. The review jurisdiction can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pute is covered by an arbitration agreement, it is imperative on the Court to refer the parties to arbitration instead of venturing to proceed to decide the suit on merit. If an express embargo is created under the statute, the Court cannot travel beyond it. The Court cannot pass such a direction which is not contemplated under Section 8 of the said Act and, therefore, the direction as sought for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... els that the respondent should be compensated in the form of costs. Accordingly, review applications being RVWO 9 of 2017 and RVWO 10 of 2017 are dismissed subject to payment of costs assessed at 1000 GM to be paid to the respondent within a fortnight from date. 6. Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
