The High Court · 2025

M/s Sridhanalakshmi Auto Agencies Pvt Ltd., (Authorised Dealer for TATA Motors Commercial Vehicles) Represented by its Managing Director Sri. Ranga Ravikanth Thirumala Kanduri Survey No.38 & 418,-Plot No. A-1, lndustrial Estate, Patancheru Village and Mandal, Sanga Reddy district, 502319, Telangana State. ...Respondents Arbitration Application filed under Sub-Secs.(5&6) of Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 r/w Para (3)(i)(c) of Scheme for appointment of Arbitrators, 2006 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint Sole Arbitrator as per Section 1 1(5 & 6) of the Arbitration & Reconciliation Act '1996 as amended as according to the terms and conditions contained in the Tax lnvoice Copy Dated 25th January-2123 to adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties, in the interest of justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Amarender Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Mr. M.V.R. Suresh Cousnel forthe Respondent No.2: Sri Manoj Kumar Akula The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REt)l)Y ARBITITATION APPLICATION No.304 OF 20:!.4, ORDER: (ORl\L) This appli :ation is filed seeking to appoint a sole ar bitrator to adjudicate the drrputes between the applicant and the respond onts arisen out of the terms tnd conditions contained in the tax invoice :t,py dated

25.01.2023

2. Heard lea ned counsel for the applicant; leamed cL)rrnsel for respondent No.l. and learned counsel for respondent No.2; an<[ perused the material on rcrcord.

3. Respondent No.2 filed counter to the Arbitration Application. (a)In the corrnter, it is contended that there is no arbitration agreemenr , much less, legally enforceable agreemenLt between the applicant and respondent no.2, as such, the Arhitration Application is not maintainable. (b)The sale nvoice issued by respondent No.l is not properly stamped a nd not legally enforceable. (c) In paragr;rph No.6 of the counter affidavit, respondent No.2 admitted that the applicant has purchased five tipper lorries of TAT.{ rnake through respondent No.2, who is the rlealer of 2 . respondent No,l, and the vehicles were delivered to the applicant on 25.01.2023. (d)It is further submitted that road capacity ofthe subject vehicre . is maximum 16 tonnes and respondent No.2 observed that the applicant used to carry road of more than 22 tonnes on the subject vehicres, and therefore the vehicres are prone to wear and tear. The vehicles were delivered in good condition. They were used by the applicant for sufliciently long time. (e) It is further stated that there is no arbitiation agreement befween the parties as per Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ,the Act,),, 4- Leamed counsel for respondent No.l submitted that respondent No.1 is the manufacturer of the subject vehicles. There is no privity pf==- contract between the applicant and respondent No.1 and claims, if any, made by the applicant can be only against respondent No.2 who sold the vehicles to the applicant and received the purchase amount.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon thejudgment ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court in Cox & Kings Ltd. v. SAp India pvt. Ltd. & anrr and submitted that the arbitrability of the dispute as against I 2024 INSC 670 3 l respondent No l .\o vill have to be decided by the lea'med arbitrator' is the manufacturer and respondent No 2 is the Respondent authorized dealer rf respondent No'l and the claim of the ap'r icant ts regarding the de livery of defective vehicles by respond'xLt No'2 manufacture<l b,v r:sPondent No' 1' Learned co rnsel for respondent No'l submitted that in oase this 6. Court is incUncd tr allow this instant application' libertl'may t'e given to respondent No. to raise preliminary objection regarding the maintainabilitl' bt fbre the leamed arbitrator' It is not irr dispute that the applicant has purchased vehicles 7. from respontlen t No.2 covered by tax invoice' Clause (1t) of the Terms and Conditions of the tax invoice raised bv respoldent No'l in respect of I'ive vehicles delivered by respondent No'2 to the applicant pror ides arbitration, which constitutes ':rrbitration agreement' lYitlrin the meaning of Section 7 of the Act' 'fhus' the dispute regarding delivery of vehicles in proper condition by respondent No.2 to the applicant is a matter to be decirlr:d by the learned Arbitra tor' In the cr rcumstances, this application ls allowed zppointing

8. Mr. M. Rajenrer, District Judge (Retired), Villa No'1'12, Keerthi \ t I i I 4 Richmond Villas, Suncity, phase_I, Hyderabad _ 5000g6 as Arbitrator to ;djudicate the claims ancI disputes between the parties and to pass an award in accordance with law. The parties are at liberty to raise all factual and legal grounds in support of their respective claims. 9' The learned Arbitrator is entitled to fees as per the rates specified in the Fourth Schedule ro the Arbitration and conc,iation Act 1gg6 inserted by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2015, No.3 of 2016, with effect from23.10.2015, which shall be bome by both parties in equal shares. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this application stand closed. SD/- M. VIJAYA BHASKER JOINT REGISTRAR NOTE: Ttrs Judgment is amended as per the.Court Order Oated O1_OS_iOZ passed in lA No .l of 2O2S in nrf eppi No. 304. ot 2024 by substituting if,e paragraph No.3- as foliows: "3. Respondent No.2 filed counter to the Arbilration Application. Fl-ln.the counter, it is contended that I_"]" i: no..arbitration agreement, much l":", tegally enforceable agreement between the applicant r..iponJ"ni ,1o_2,. "r such, the Arbitration Application rs not maintainable. "na rssued bY perly stamPed (D) lne sale lnv llce respondent No.1 s nc. Pro and not legallY enforce able (c) ln ParagraPh Nc 6 of the counter atfrOavit, respondent lrlo.2 admitted that the applicant has pu chased five tipper lorries of TATA make through respondent No.2, wh: is the dealer of respondent No 1, z nd the and the vehicles were deliver,:d to the applicant on25.O1 .2023. (d) lt is further st bmitted that load capacity of the s.rbject vehicle is maximum '16 tonneri and resPondent No.2 observed that tle applicant used to carry load of more lhi'n 22 tonnes on the subject vehicles, zrnd therefore the vehicles are prone to wear and tear. The vehicles were de livered in good condition. TheY wt,te used bY the applicant for sufficienlly long time. (e) lt is further stak',d that there is no arbitration agreem€ nt between the parties as per Sectior, 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 1996 (for short 'the Acf)." ln place of paragral,h No.3: "learned counsel for the resPondent No.2 submitted that respoldent No.2 is not opposing this instant a :plication. And by incorporating t're paragraph No.7 as: "lt is not in dispute thzrt the applicant has purchased vehicles from respondent No.2 covered by tax rrvoice. Clause (7) of the Terms and Co rditions of the tax invoice raised by re ;pondent No.1 in respect of five vehi,;les delivered by respondent No.2 t I the applicant provides arbitration, which constitutes 'arbitration agreemc,nt' within the meaning of Section 7 of the Act. Thus, the dispute regarding rlelivery of vehicles in proper condition b'' respondent No.2 to the applicant is a matter to be decided by the learned Arbitrat,rr." And by correcting the remaining paragraphs of the orr:ler in seriatum as No.8 and No.9. ".**-'-r- -,97 -' i{ffi#:;1";io, substitutes despatched 'tl =_:-___ I SD/- MjEifIA="JlSii[^.[ //TRUE COPYII Suncity, Phase-1

1. Mr. M Rajender District Judge (Retired), Vifla trt Villas (Atong with a Co 2. OneCCto S P. 3.one CC to Mr. M 4.o ne CC to Sri Manoj KumarAkula, Adv 5.7wo CD Copie yderabad H py of affid avit and m aterial p6 Amarende r Reddy, A dvocate I .V,R. Sure sh, Advocat e loPUCl ocate [OpUCf n S pers) OPUCJ ,SECT|ON OFFICER 42 Keerthi Richmond 500086 (By special Messenger) T o Karn/DL M/ 7 \ t HIGH COURT DATED i261031"2025 01105,12025 l I l I v 7. St Atl :::\. ,{ ,t.l :\l\ o O Irl 1!I1 t1 a' n |^-::--',-.--.' ,j AMENDED OTIDER ARBAPPL.No.304 of 2024 ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICATIOIN @N t q) 'lt|