9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 1208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory policy so that interference is restricted to orders which are patently lacking in inherent jurisdiction. It was further observed in the M/S. DEEP INDUSTRIES LIMITED VERSUS OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED ANR. [ 2019 (11) TMI 1632 - SUPREME COURT] that, if petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against orders passed in appeals under Arbitration Act were entertained, the entire arbitral process would be derailed and would not come to fruition for many years. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the impugned order allowing the Section 8 application would not be maintainable. All grounds in respect of existence and validity of the arbitration clause can be raise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL 1. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the judgment dated 04th August, 2018 passed by the Additional District Judge 05, South-East, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Suit No.1462/2017, whereby the application filed on behalf of the respondent/ defendant under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Act ) has been allowed. 2. This matter came up for hearing before this Court on 11th December, 2018 when notice was issued. Subsequently an application for early hearing was filed on behalf of the petitioner which was allowed by this Court on 9th September, 2021. The respondent has filed a reply and the petitioner has also filed a rejoinder. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 8 of the Act was filed by the respondent before filing the written statement. (iii) The petitioner had admitted the receipt of Annexures 1, 2 and 3 to the Letter of Intent and therefore, a legally binding contract was entered into between the parties, even if the said annexures did not bear the signatures of the petitioner. (iv) Petitioner has nowhere denied the existence of arbitration agreement contained in the documents annexed with the Letter of Intent. (v) In a similar matter being CS(COMM) 601/2017 titled as A.S. Nutech Electrical Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Larsen Toubro Ltd., this Court has already referred the matter for arbitration and the petitioner is one of the directors in the said plaintiff company. (vi) The petitioner had de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26th July, 2017 in CM(M) 84/2017 titled as Asha Saini v. Omaxe Limited. Counsel also places reliance of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums, (2003) 6 SCC 503 to contend that when an arbitration agreement exists between the parties it is obligatory for the courts to refer the parties to arbitration in terms of the arbitration agreement. The counsel for the respondent further contends that whether the documents as sought by the respondent from the petitioner vide email dated 10th November, 2016 were supplied by the petitioner to the respondent is to be decided by the Arbitrator in the Arbitration Proceedings. 7. Coming first to the maintainability of the present petition, cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in appeals under Arbitration Act were entertained, the entire arbitral process would be derailed and would not come to fruition for many years. The reasoning given by the Supreme Court in Deep Industries Ltd. (supra) would be equally applicable in the context of orders passed by courts allowing application under Section 8 of the Act. 9. The Division Bench of this Court in Black Dimond Track Parts Private Limited vs. Black Diamond Motors Parts Private Limited 2021 SCC Online Del 2630 (of which I was a part), applying the ratio of the Supreme Court in Deep Industries Ltd. (supra) observed that jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has to be sparingly exercised in respect of orders passed by the commercial court so tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use in the Agreement is accepted by both the parties as also by the courts below but the applicability thereof is disputed by the respondent and the said dispute is accepted by the courts below. Be that as it may, at the cost of repetition, we may again state that the existence of the arbitration clause is admitted. If that be so, in view of the mandatory language of Section 8 of the Act, the courts below ought to have referred the dispute to arbitration. xxx xxx xxx 16. It is clear from the language of the section, as interpreted by the Constitution Bench judgment in Konkan Rly. [(2002) 2 SCC 388] that if there is any objection as to the applicability of the arbitration clause to the facts of the case, the same will have to be raised befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
