DISTRICT PANCHAYAT v. PREMJIBHAI LAXMANBHAI PARMAR
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
present Civil Revision Application is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.K.TRIVEDI Date of decision: 09/04/2002 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Rule. Mr. Sukhwani, learned advocate for the respondents waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. Rule is fixed forthwith. Heard Mr. Hathi, learned advocate for the petitioner - original defendant and Mr. Sukhwani, learned advocate for the respondent original plaintiff. As found from the order under challenge, the petitioner defendant has filed application Ex. 18 before the learned Trial Judge in a suit filed by the respondent plaintiff being Regular Civil Suit No. 107 of 1999, wherein, the plaintiff had prayed for disposal of the suit under Order 7 of the Civil Procedure Code and request was made that the dispute in the suit be referred to the arbitrator. An application Ex. 21 was also filed by the petitioner defendant in the said suit, wherein, the request was made that the suit filed by the respondent plaintiff in view of the provisions u/s. 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, the suit filed by the respondent plaintiff be referred to arbitrator. The learned trial Judge after hearing above two applications has as per order dated 18.8.2000 has disposed of both the applications by observing that order will be passed on applications Ex. 18 and 21 after hearing the application Ex.5 filed by the respondent plaintiff.
3.(cid:9)As found from the ordersheet, while issuing notice to the respondents stay of further proceedings of the suit has been granted in favour of the petitioner defendant. On considering the submissions and order under challenge, where the learned trial Judge has disposed of applications Exs.18 and 21, which according to the defendant the dispute is required to be referred to in view of the provisions of 8 (1) of the Act to the Arbitrator. It is true that by filing suit before the learned Judge, the plaintiff has filed application Ex.5 for seeking interim relief till the pendency of the suit. Learned trial Judge though has heard the applications Ex.18 and 21, it is observed in the order that orders will be passed after hearing Ex. 5 filed by the plaintiff.
Operative part
4.(cid:9)Considering the submissions made before me and order under challenge, this court is of the view that as the application below Ex. 18 and 21 are regarding the disputes between the parties be referred to the Arbitrator and the learned trial Judge has heard both the applications and therefore, it is the duty of the learned trial Judge to decide the said applications first. Accordingly, order passed below Application Exs. 18 and 21 are quashed and set aside and the learned trial Judge is directed to decide the application Exs. 18 and 21 as expeditiously as possible. With these observations, present Civil Revision Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. (cid:9) (cid:9)(D.K.Trivedi,J.) (cid:9) (cid:9) (cid:9) pallav
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: present Civil Revision Application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 8.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 09 Apr 2002. The bench was D K TRIVEDI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.