9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al exercise or failure to exercise the power conferred on the trial Court in negating the relief. Hence, it is not a fit case for interference of this Court. When the agreement is not in writing and it is only an understanding, the alleged condition of agreement for reference would not fall within the ambit of Section 7 of the Act. In any view of the matter, it is for the revision petitioner to file, if there is an understanding in writing duly signed by both parties along with the petition. However, it is wholly unnecessary to decide about maintainability of the petition in view of bar to entertain petition under Section 8(2) of the Act, as the petitioner himself admitted about the understanding and that apart it is already concluded that this Court cannot exercise its discretionary power under Section 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere in the order in question. There are no ground or legal infirmity which calls for interference of this Court, devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed - petition dismissed. - Civil Revision Petition No. 4515 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 12-3-2015 - Ramesh Ranganathan And M. Satyanarayana Murthy, JJ. For Appellant: Prabhakar P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lause in proper perspective and the Courts are supposed to interpret the terms of contract basing on the intention of the parties and inadvertent drafting of clause itself is not sufficient to decline the relief and prayed to allow the revision and refer the matter to arbitrator, P. Subba Rao for settlement of dispute in this suit. 6. During the course of argument, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P. Prabhakar would contend that the Court has to interpret the clauses of the contract based on the intention of the parties incorporating such clause but failure to interpret the clause in the agreement or contract would cause prejudice to the petitioner, if the intention of the parties is taken into consideration, while incorporating clause No. 8 in the agreement as pleaded in the plaint, it is clear that the intention of the petitioner and respondents is only to refer any dispute relating to the contract, to P. Subba Rao appointing him as an arbitrator. But the trial Court on an erroneous interpretation of the clause regarding arbitration, dismissed the petition erroneously and relied on Punjab State v. Dina Nath, S.N. Prasad Hitek Industries (Bihar) v. Monnet Finance Lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... injustice to any party (vide Ouseph Mathai and others v. M. Abdul Khadir) 13. As per Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court can exercise powers sparingly with utmost care. It is purely discretionary in nature and such discretion has to be exercised with great circumspection and care. 14. This Court while exercising power under Article 227 can exercise its discretion in the a) When the inferior court assumes jurisdiction erroneously in excess of power. b) When refused to exercise jurisdiction. c) When found an error of law apparent on the face of record. d) Violated principles of natural justice. e) Arbitrary or capricious exercise of authority or discretion. f) Arriving at a finding which is perverse or based on no material. g) A patent or flagrant error in procedure. h) Order resulting in manifest injustice. i) Error both on facts and law or even otherwise. 15. In the following circumstances this Court cannot exercise its discretion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India: a) Where the only question involved is one of interpretation of deed (New Gujarat Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Labour Appellate Tribunal). b) On question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failure of registration; (v) Rs. 5 lakhs advance to be forfeited on 30-09-2009 if no registration done by defendant/tenant. No review of any terms of this agreement. (vi) Sunil Ganu to make agreement of sale/sale deed fees by both 50:50 to the lawyer Mr. Ganu; (vii) If plaintiffs/landlords does not register when defendant/tenant is ready then Rs. 12,500/- per month interest shall be paid to defendant/tenant. Defendant/tenant will pay Rs. 30,000/- per month as mesne profits w.e.f 1-10-2009 if he still continue in occupation without getting the registration. Defendant/tenant shall pay normal rent until registration on full payment of purchase consideration. Plaintiffs/landlords cannot go back on sale of flat @ Rs. 48 lakhs; (viii) Arbitrator is P. Subba Rao for interpretation of this agreement (ix) Suit property is sold as is where is basis in respect of title/sanction/measurements/condition. 19. It is evident from the clause (viii) mentioned in para 3 of plaint with regard to reference to arbitrator is unambiguous. However, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that the Court has to interpret the document, taking into consideration, the int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the matter, the principle laid down by the Apex Court is of no avail to the revision petitioner. 23. The learned counsel further placed reliance on Jagdish Chander v. Ramesh Chander, the Apex Court laid down the principle as to how a clause in the agreement, pertaining to reference to arbitration is to be interpreted basing on the earlier judgments. In para 8(1) held as follows: Clause in a contract cannot be construed as an arbitration agreement only if an agreement to refer disputes or differences to arbitration is expressly or impliedly spelt out from the clause. We may at this juncture set out the well-settled principles in regard to what constitute an arbitration agreement. 1. The intention of the parties to enter into an arbitration agreement shall have to be gathered from the terms of the agreement. If the terms of the agreement clearly indicate an intention on the part of the parties to the agreement to refer their disputes to a private tribunal for adjudication and a willingness to be bound by the decision of such tribunal on such disputes, it is arbitration agreement. While there is no specific form of an arbitration agreement, the words used should disclose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cument. Time and again, the Court have laid down certain principles to interpret any document or clauses therein. In fact there are no statutory rules to interpret any document. But based on the settled principles, the Courts are interpreting the documents and any conditions contained therein. Rules of interpretation are mere working rules or as guidelines and are not binding on the Courts of law. Yet, they have some sanctity as they have been deduced from judicial decision over the years. It is found listed in Odgers Construction of Deeds and Statutes, used the listed rules by the Courts and they have acquired respectability. The Supreme Court in Delhi Development Authority v. Durga Chand has also noticed Odgers Rules and quoted them with approval and as the observation of the Supreme Court have the force of law of the land, it may be taken Odgers Rules (known as golden rules of interpretation) have been judicially recognized and may be adopted as Rules for interpretation of the documents in India. These Rules are listed hereunder: 1. The meaning of the document or of a particular part of it is therefore to be sought for in the document itself. 2. The intention may prevail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll prevail. The most essential thing is to collect the intention of the parties from the expressions they have used in the deed itself. What if, the intention is so collected will not secure with the words used. The answer is the intention prevails. Therefore, if the language used in the document is unambiguous, the words used in the document itself will prevail but not the intention. Here, there is nothing ambiguous in clause (viii) of para 3 of the plaint and the parties intended to refer the agreement to P. Subba Rao only to know the meaning of the terms of the agreement but not for any other purpose. Therefore, the arbitration clause is limited to the extent to refer the document/agreement for interpretation and not for resolving any disputes between the parties. In such a case, the Court need not look into the intention of the parties in interpreting a particular clause in the agreement, when the language used in the document is unambiguous and clear. When there is a dispute with regard to interpretation of clauses of the contract, contract is to be referred to P. Subba Rao, the named arbitrator not for any other purpose. 28. In Smt. Rukmanibai Gupta v. Collector, Jabalpur, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... legal proceeding which is sought to be stayed must be in respect of a matter which the parties have agreed to refer and which comes within the ambit of the arbitration agreement. Where, however, a suit is commenced as to a matter which lies outside the submission, the Court is bound to refuse a stay. 32. In Atul Singh v. Sunil Kumar Singh, the question before Supreme Court was that as to interpretation of clause to find out whether the dispute is within the arbitration clause came up for consideration and the Apex Court held that when the relief claimed in the suit could be granted by civil Court and not by arbitrator, such dispute cannot be referred. Further held that compliance of Section 8(2) of the Act is mandatory. 33. The Division Bench of this Court rendered in Andhra Co-operative Spinning Mills Ltd., Guntakal v. C. Sriniyasan, at para-12 held as under: The submission to arbitration being governed by a written contract, the terms of that contract must be looked into when a question arises as to whether the arbitration clause governs the dispute. Arbitration clauses, as is well-known, very widely in their language because they incorporate the desire of the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch a case, the civil Courts cannot refer the dispute by exercising power under Section 8 of the Act to the Arbitrator, named therein. 35. On over all consideration of entire material available on record, it is evident that the clause referred to in the earlier paras referring to arbitrator is unambiguous and the intention of the parties need not be looked into, since, intention would not prevail when the language used in the condition is unambiguous. Therefore, on strict construction of the condition relating to reference to arbitration, the trial Court rightly declined to grant the relief to the petitioner. 36. In view of the limited powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as discussed in the earlier paras. The case on hand would not cover any of the circumstances referred to above, to exercise discretion to grant relief. That apart we find no illegal exercise or failure to exercise the power conferred on the trial Court in negating the relief. Hence, it is not a fit case for interference of this Court. 37. One of the contentions of Sri Narender Reddy, learned senior counsel is that the petition is not accompanied by copy of the arbitration ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
