Madrasdated High Court · 2011

M/S.SRI JAYAMALAR SPINNING MILLS P LTD. REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.K.KRISHNASAMY SF NO.1113/3 POLLACHI ROAD SAKTHIVINAYAGAPURAM KODUVAI TIRUPUR DIST...PETITIONER IN W.P.19839 OF 2011 19840, 19841, 19842 OF 2011 M/S.SIVAJOTHI TEXTILES REP.BY ITS MANAGER MR.P.SAMPATH RAJ 26 H URUMANDAMPALAYAM COIMBATORE-641 029. ..PETITIONER IN W.P.19879,19880 OF 2011 M/S.ROHINI TEXTILE INDUSTRY PRIVATE LTD. REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR.R.SEMALAIAPPAN NO.2 ROHINI GARDEN KANGAYAM ROAD TIRUPUR-641604...PETITIONER IN W.P19881, 19882, 19883,19884 OF 2011 M/S.RAJSHANTHI SPINNERS REP.BY ITS PARTNER MR.M.THANGARAJ 24 VIVEKANANTHA ROAD UDYAMPALAYAM CHINNAVADDAMPATTY (PO)COIMBATORE-641 006..PETITIONER IN W.P.19885, 19886/2011M/S.SWAMY COTTON MILL TIRUPUR (P) LTD. REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.C.ESWARAN S.F.NO.407/2 PEERCHANGADU VELLANCHETTIPALAYA MANGALAM-641 663. ..PETITIONER IN W.P.19887,19888 OF 2011 M/S.THE GOBALD TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR MR.S.VEERA SHANMUGHAM AMMAPALAYAM ANUPPARPALAYAM POST TIRUPUR-641 652...PETITIONER IN W.P.19889/201119890 OF 2011 M/S.SREE KAILAII SPINNERS PRIVATE LIMITED REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR MR.S.MOHAN SHANKAR 126 VELLAKINAR POST COIMBATORE-641029...PETITIONER IN W.P.19891 OF 2011 M/S.ARUNACHALA SPINNING MILLS INDIA (P) LTD.REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR M.DURAISAMYNO.32 EROKKADU 4TH STREET KARUVAMPALAYAM TIRUPUR-641 604. ..PETTIONER IN W.P.19892 OF 2011 19893 OF 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ M/S.SRI RAJA VINAYAGAR MILLS REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.R.SAMINATHAN R.O.3/3 AMARJOTHI GARDEN 1ST STREET KANGAYAM ROAD TIRUPUR-641 604...PETITIONER IN W.P.19985,19986, 19987,19988, 19989/2011M/S.JOTHIKANNAN TEXTILES PVT. LTD REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR MR.J.SENTHILMURUGAN ANTHIYRU PULANKINAR POST UDUMALPET TALUK TIRUPPUR DISTRICT ..PETITIONER IN W.P.20076 OF 2011 M/S.SREE MOOKAMBIGA TEXTILES PVT.LTD. REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.J.SENTHILMURUGAN ANTHIYUR PULANKINAR POST UDUMALPET TALUK TIRUPUR DIST...PETITIONER IN W.P.20087/201120088/2011 M/S.SOUTHERN COSTSPINNERS COIMBATOREP LTD REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTORD.ANAND, 27/9A, THIRU NAGAR, SINGANALLURCOIMBATORE..PETITIONER IN W.P.20161, 20162/2011M/S. SRI KARPAGAM MILLS INDIA (P) LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.A.SOMASUNDARAM 3 SAMIAN THOTTAM UDAYAMPALAYAM CHINNAVEDAMPATTI POST COIMBATORE-641006...PETITIONER IN W.P.20163, 20164/2011M/S.SREE VENGADALAKSHMI SPINNERS REP. BY ITS PROPRIETRIX MRS.R.PUSHPA 347/1 SENGALIPALAYAM ROAD IDIGARAI NGGO COLONY COIMBATORE-641 022. ...PETITIONER IN W.P.20165/2011 20166,20167,20168, 20169/2011M/S.EVERWIN TEXTILE MILL PVT. LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.K.PERIASAMY 4/12 CHITHAPPA AVENUE RAYAPURAM MAIN ROAD TIRUPUR-641601...PETITIONER IN W.P.20260, 20261, 20262,20263, 20264, 20265/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SRI KRISHNA TEXTILES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP.BY ITS PARTNER K.L.SUNDARARAJ K.VADAMADURAI COIMBATORE-641 017...PETITIONER IN W.P.20280 OF 2011 JANYA SPINNERS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP. BY ITS PARTNER K.L.SUNDARARAJ K.VADAMADURAI COIMBATORE-641017...PETITIONER IN W.P.20291 OF 2011 M/S. LEEDS SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR R.PALANISAMY SF 233 ELANGO LAYOUT II STREET KANGAYAM CROSS ROAD TIRUPUR-641604. ..PETITIONER IN W.P.20500, 20501, 20502, 20503/2011M/S. BHARANI COTTON MILLS REP. BY ITS PARTNER MR.V.SOUNDAR S.F.NO.333/2B KANNAMPALAYAM ROAD SULUR (VIA) KANNAMPALAYAM COIMBATORE-641402...PETITIONER IN W.P.20504 OF 2011 M/S. KARIKALIAMMAN SPINNING MILLS P. LTD. REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR MR.M.KARTHIKEYAN NO.118 NMS COMPOUND ERODE-638001....PETITIONER IN W.P.20505 OF 2011 M/S.VASU YARN MILLS INDIA (P) LTD REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SHRI VASUDEVAN REGD OFF: 220/11 NARAYAN NAGAR CUTCHERRY STREET GOBICHETTIPALAYAM ERODE DISTRICT...PETITIONER IN W.P.20506, 20507, 20508,20509,20509,20510/2011 M/S.SURYA PRABHA MILLS (P) LTD REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NO. 6/527 PHALGHAT ROAD KUNIMATAHUR COIMBATORE 641 008..PETITIONER IN W.P.20789, 20790 OF 2011 M/S.AMMAN SPINNING MILLS REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR.S.D. MANDHARACHALAM NO.880 UNION OFFICE (OPP) TIRUPUR TO POLLACHI ROAD SULTHANPET COIMBATORE 641 669 ..PETITIONER IN W.P.20895, 20896, 20897/2011 M/S.ARUN SHANKAR TEXTILES REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTORMR.G. RAVI SHANKAR NO.03 MILL ROAD https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SOMANUR COIMBATORE 641 668FACTORY AT S.F.NO.171/1A PETHANAICKENPALAYAM VILLAGEAVINASHI TALUK, PONGALUR PO.PUNJAI PULIAMPATTI-638 459..PETITIONER IN W.P.20898 OF 2011M/S.MANTHARAGIRI TEXTILES REP BY ITS PARTNER MR.G. SUBRAMANIAM 78/2-C-2 SENJERIMALAI P.O. SULTHANPET VIA SULUR T.K. COIMBATORE 641 669 ..PETITIONER IN W.P.20899 OF 2011M/S.POWER SPINNING MILLS REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER S.P.SAMINATHAN 192 192/1 GOUNDACHIPUDUR ROAD ELLIS NAGAR DHARAPURAM-638 657...PETITIONER IN W.P.21460, 21462/2011M/S. SRI S.V.M. SPINNING MILLS PVT.LTS,REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR B. RENUKA,2033, BEGA SAHIBA NAGAR, KUUTIA PATTI (P.O)BATLAGUNDU ROAD, DINDIGUL 642 002...PETITIONER IN W.P.21461/11Vs.1. M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A.Government of India undertakingMininstry of Textiles) P.B.7103,No.1057, Trichy Road, Ramanathapuram,Coimbatore 641 045...1st Respondent in W.P.19447,W.P.19448/11, 19449, 19450, 19451, 19452, 19453, 19454/11, 19467, 19468, 19469, 19470,19471/11,18651,18652,18653,18654, 18655,18656,18657,18658,18659, 18660,18663,18664,18665,18666,18667,18668 18669,18670,18671,18672,18673/11, 18819,18820,18821,18822,18823,18824, 18825,19085,19086/11,19823,19824,19825 19826,19827,19828,19829,19830,19831,19832 19833,19834,19835,19836,19837,19838, 19839,19840,19841,19842,19879, 19880,19881,19882,19883,19884, 19885,19886,19887,19888,19889,19890, 19891,19892,19893,19985,19986,19987, 19988,19989,20076,20087,20088,20161, 20162,20163,20164,20165,20166,20167, 20168,20169,20260,20261,20262,20263, 20264,20265,20500,20501,20502,20503, 20504,20505,20506,20507,20508,20509, 20510,20789,20790,20895,20896,20897, 20898,20899,21460,20461,21462/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Munistry of Textiles) Kapas Bhawan, Plot. No.3A, Sector 10,Chd.Belapur,Navi Mumbai-400 614... 2nd Respondent in W.P.19447, 19448, 19449, 19450, 19451, 19452, 19453, 19454/11, 19467, 19468,19469, 19470,19471/11, 18651,18652,18653,18654,18655,18656, 18657,18658,18659,18660,18663,18664, 18665,18666,18667,18668,18669, 18670, 18671,18672,18673,18819,18820,18821, 18822,18823,18824,18825,19823,19824, 19825,19826,19827,19828,19829,19830, 19831,19832,19833,19834,19835,19836, 19837,19838,19839,19840,19841,19842, 19879,19880,19881,19882,19883,19884, 19885,19886,19887,19888,19889,19890, 19891,19892,19893,19985,19986,19987, 19988,19889,19890,19891,19892,19893, 19985,19986,19987,19988,19989,20076, 20087,20088,20161,20162,20163,20164, 20165,20166,20167,20168,20169,20260, 20261,20262,20263,20264,20265,20280, 20291,20500,20501,20502,20503,20504, 20505,20506,20507,20508,20509,20510, 20789,20790,20895,20896,20897,20898, 20899,21460,21461,21462/112. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd,(A Government of India undertaking,Ministry of Textiles) Vidya Nagar, Akola 444 001...2nd Respondent in W.P.19085, 19086/20113rd Respondent in W.P.19826, 19828, 19841, 20166, 20169, 20260, 20507,20509, 20895, 20896, 21462/11 19833/113. M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A.Government of India Undertaking,Ministry of Textiles)Kapas Bhavan, 27-A, Race Course Road,Indore-452 003... 3rd Respondent in W.P.19448/11 19881, 19883, 20165, 20508, 20899/11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking 11-25-32, A.N.R.Complex, II Floor,Vasavi Colony Road, P.B.No.9,Warangal-02...3rd Respondent in W.P.19449/11 20504/11, 19452/113. M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., (A Government of IndiaUndertaking, Ministry of Textiles)Chandar Mouli Building, Plot.No.27,Samrat Nagar, Veer Savarkar Chowk,Shahnoorwadi Road, Aurangahad-431 005. .. 3rd Respondent in W.P.19450/11, 19823,19824, 19825, 19827,19832,19834,19835, 19842,19880,19882,19884,19885,19886,19887,19985,19986,19989,20163,20167,20168,20263,20500,20505,20506,20510,20897,20898,21461/114th Respondent in W.P.19467, 19468, 19471, 20076, 20087/113. M/s. The Cotton Corporation of IndiaLtd, (A Government of India undertakingMinistry of Textiles) Ruda Building5th floor, Jamnagar Road,Raykot - 360 001...3rd Respondent in W.P.19451/11 19837, 19838, 19839,19840,19879,20164, 20261,20264,20503/11 4th Respondent in W.P.19892/20113. M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking,Ministry of Textiles) 4/2 Ashok Nagar,Guntur 522 002...3rd Respondent in W.P.19453/11Andhur Pradesh 19888, 19889, 19890, 19891, 20162/11, ..4th Respondent in W.P.20789, 20790/11..Ist Respondent in W.P.20280/11, 20291/113. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., (A Government ofIndia undertaking, Ministry of Textiles)G.M.R Tower, Ist Floor,Cinema Road, Adilahad-504001..3rd Respondent in W.P.19454/11 20501/11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4th Respondent in WP.19469/20113. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking,Ministry of Textiles) Sakar-1,10th floor,Mr.Gandhigram Railway Station,Near Nehru brudge, Ashram road,Ahmedahad 380 009... 3rd Respondent in w.P.19829/11 19830/19987,20262,20262, 20265, 20502, 21460/114th Respondent in W.P.19893/113. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking,Ministry of Textiles) 3rd floor,W.B. Plaza, New Cotton Market, Huhli 580 029..3rd Respondent in W.P.19831/114th Respondent in WP.20088/20113. The Cotton Corpration of India Ltd.,A Government of India Undertaking)(Ministry of Textiles) 34, Main Sector,Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara ..3rd Respondent in Wp.19836/11 19988/20113.The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India Undertaking,Ministry of Textiles) Constania 3rd floor,II, Dr.U.N. Brahmachani Street,Kolkata 700 017...3rd Respondent in WP.20161/11 4.The Government of IndiaMinistry of TextilesRep. by its SecretaryUdyog Bhavan, New Delhi-110011 ..4th Respondent in WP 19447, 19448, 19454, 19823 to 19842, 19879,19880, 19881, 19882, 19883, 19884, 19885, 19886, 19887, 19888, 19889, 19890, 19891, 19985, 19986, 19987, 19988, 19989, 20161, 20162, 20163, 20164, 20165, 20166, 20167, 20168, 20169, 20260, 20261, 20262, 20263, 20264, 20365, 20500, 20501, 20502, 20503, 20504, 20505, 20506, 20507, 20508, 20509, 20510, 20895, 20896, 20897, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 20898, 21460, 21461, 21462 of 2011 3rd Respondent in WP 19467 to 19471, 18651, 18652, 18653, 18654, 18655, 18656, 18657, 18658, 18659, 18660, 18663, 18664, 18665, 18666, 18667, 18668, 18669, 18670, 18671, 18672, 18672, 18673, 18819, 18820, 18821, 18822, 18823, 18824, 18825, 19085, 18086, 19892, 19893, 20076, 20087, 20088, 20280, 20291, 20789, 20790 of 20114.The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,Paraskar Towers, Additional workshop,Ist and 2nd Floor, Vidya Nagar,Akola-444001, Maharastra ..4th Respondent in WP 19470/2011WP.No.19447/2011: Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ ofDeclaration, declaring the contract Sale Contract No:112 dated6.1.2011 entered between the petitioner and third respondent asnull and void besides directing the respondent to refund theEarnest Money Deposit of the petitioner lying with the first tothird respondent.Petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of India,praying to issue a writ of declaration declaring the contract sale contract No.31, dated 10.1.2011 (WP 19448/2011), sale contract No.32, dated 10.1.2011 (WP 19449/11), sale contract No.142, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 19450/11), sale contract No.CC1/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-2011/cont.No.37, dated24.1.2011 (WP 19451/11), sale contract No.50, dated 10.3.2011 (WP 19452/11),sale contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/42, dated 10.3.2011 (WP19453/11), sale contract No.CCI/ADB/MKTG(S)/2010-11/50, dated 10.3.2011 (WP19454/11),contract No.158, dated 8.2.2011 (WP 19467/11), contract No.164, dated 9.2.2011 (WP 19468/11),contract No.42, dated 17.1.2011 (WP 19469/11),contract No.73, dated 17.1.2011 (WP 19470/11),contract No.163, dated 9.2.2011 (WP 19471/11),sale contract No.77, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 18651/11), Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-34, dated20.1.2011 (WP 18652/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.27, dated10.1.2011 (WP 18653/11),Sale Contract No.56, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 18654/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/30, dated 12.1.2011 (WP18655/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/35, dated 20.1.2011 (WP https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 18656/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.15, dated30.12.2011 (WP 18657/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/38, dated 21.1.2011 (WP18658/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/28, dated 10.1.2011 (WP18659/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/17, dated 29.12.2010(WP 18660/11),Sale Contract No.62, dated 6.12.2010 (WP 18663/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/27, dated 10.1.2011 (WP18664/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/36, dated 20.12.2010(WP 18665/11),Sale Contract No.29, dated 10.12.2010 (WP 18666/11),Sale Contract No.27, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 18667/11),Sale Contract No.80, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 18668/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-20, dated7.1.2011 (WP 18669/11),Sale Contract No.58, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 18670/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/34, dated 20.1.2011 (WP18671/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-26, dated10.1.2011 (WP 18672/11),Sale Contract No.135, dated 14.1.2011 (WP 18673/11),Sale Contract No.65, dated 6.12.2010 (WP 18819/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/44, dated 28.1.2011 (WP18820/11),Sale Contract No.30, dated 5.1.2011 (WP 18821/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/HBL/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/23, dated 28.1.2011 (WP18822/11),Sale Contract No.59, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 18823/11),Sale Contract No.25, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 18824/11),Sale Contract No.81, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 18825/11),Sale Contract No.28, dated 8.11.2010 (WP 19823/11),Sale Contract No.45, dated 10.11.2010 (WP 19824/11),Sale Contract No.63, dated 6.12.2010 (WP 19825/11),Sale Contract No.25, dated 10.12.2010 (WP 19826/11),Sale Contract No.78, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 19827/11),Sale Contract No.61, dated 30.12.2010 (WP 19828/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/31, dated 12.1.2011 (WP19829/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/46, dated 28.1.2011 (WP19830/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/HBL/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/24, dated 28.1.2011 (WP19831/11),Sale Contract No.59, dated 6.12.2010 (WP 19832/11),Sale Contract No.21, dated 10.12.2010 (WP 19833/11),Sale Contract No.72, dated 13.12.2010 (WP 19834/11),Sale Contract No.85, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 19835/11), https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sale Contract No.8, dated 1.2.2011 (WP 19836/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-42, dated28.1.2011 (WP 19837/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-47, dated14.2.2011 (WP 19838/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RAJKOT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT-31,dated 12.1.2011 (WP 19839/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RAJKOT/MKTG/SALES/10-11/CONT NO.RJT-32, dated19.1.2011 (WP 19840/11),Sale Contract No.94, dated 7.2.2011 (WP 19841/11),Sale Contract No.153, dated 7.2.2011 (WP 19842/11),Sale Contract No.39, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 19879/11),Sale Contract No.161, dated 9.2.2011 (WP 19880/11),Sale Contract No.18, dated 27.12.2010 (WP 19881/11),Sale Contract No.95, dated 27.12.2010 (WP 19882/11),Sale Contract No.19, dated 28.12.2010 (WP 19883/11),Sale Contract No.100, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 19884/11),Sale Contract No.144, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 19885/11),Sale Contract No.160, dated 9.2.2011 (WP 19886/11),Sale Contract No.120, dated 10.1.2011 (WP 19887/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/27 dated 10.1.2011 (WP19888/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/48 dated 22.3.2011 (WP19889/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/53 dated 7.4.2011 (WP19890/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/10-11/52 dated 5.4.2011 (WP19891/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/48 dated 21.2.2011 (WP19892/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/47 dated 21.2.2011 (WP19893/11),Sale Contract No.96, dated 27.12.2010 (WP 19985/11),Sale Contract No.104, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 19986/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/45, dated 28.1.2011 (WP19987/11),Sale Contract No.11, dated 7.2.2011 (WP 19988/11),Sale Contract No.154, dated 7.2.2011 (WP 19989/11),Sale Contract No.130, dated 13.1.2011 (WP 20076/11),Sale Contract No.128, dated 13.1.2011 (WP 20087/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/HBL/MKTG(SALES)/2010-11/18, dated 28.1.2011(WP 20088/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/KOL/SALES(RGD)/7/2010-11/6, dated 4.3.2011 (WP20161/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG/(S)/2010-11/51, dated 1.4.2011 (WP20162/11),Sale Contract No.132, dated 13.1.2011 (WP 20163/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.40, dated24.1.2011 (WP 20164/11),Sale Contract No.24, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 20165/11), https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sale Contract No.63, dated 30.12.2010 (WP 20166/11),Sale Contract No.61, dated 6.12.2019 (WP 20167/11),Sale Contract No.83, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 20168/11),Sale Contract No.57, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 20169/11),Sale Contract No.87, dated 28.1.2011 (WP 20260/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT.46, dated28.1.2011 (WP 20261/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/42, dated 28.1.2011 (WP20262/11),Sale Contract No.155, dated 7.2.2011 (WP 20263/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.RJT.49, dated21.2.2011 (WP 20264/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/48, dated 21.2.2011 (WP20265/11),Sale Contract No.CBE/663/24.1.2011, (WP 20280/11),Sale Contract No.CBE/892/11.3.2011 and CBE/893/11.3.2011 (WP20291/11),Sale Contract No.99, dated 29.12.2010 (WP 20500/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/ADB/MKTG-S/2010-11/23/6667, dated 29.12.2010(WP 20501/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/22, dated 30.12.2010(WP 20502/11),Sale Contract No.CCI/RJT/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/CONT NO.14, dated30.12.2010 (WP 20503/11),Sale Contract No.23, dated 3.1.2011 (WP 20504/11),Sale Contract No.79, dated 20.12.2010 (WP 20505/11),Sale Contract No.122, dated 10.1.2011 (WP 20506/11),Sale Contract No.71, dated 17.1.2011 (WP 20507/11),Sale Contract No.39, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 20508/11),Sale Contract No.81, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 20509/11),Sale Contract No.139, dated 24.1.2011 (WP 20510/11),Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/47, dated 21.3.2011(WP 20789/11),Contract No.CCI/GNT/MKTG(S)/2010-11/50, dated 1.4.2011(WP 20790/11),Sale contract No.70 dated 17.1.2011 (W.P.20895/2011)Sale contract No.84 dated 24.1.2011 (W.P.20896/2011)Sale contract No.143 dated 24.1.2011 (W.P.20897/2011)Sale contract No.101 dated 29.12.2010 (W.P.20898/2011)Sale contract No.40 dated 24.1.2011 (W.P.20899/2011)Sale contract No.CCI/AHD/MKTG/SALES/2010-11/33 dated 30.12.2010 (W.P.21460/2011)Sale contract No.129 dated 13.1.2011 (W.P.21461/2011)Sale contract No.74 dated 17.1.2011 (W.P.20462/2011)entered between the petitioner and the 3rd Respondent as null and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ void besides directing the respondent herein to refund the Earnestmoney deposit of the petitioner lying with the 3rd Respondent W.P.19448, 19449, 19451, 19452, 19453, 19823,19824, 19825, 19826, 19827, 19828, 19829,19830, 19831, 19832, 19833, 19834, 19835, 19836, 19837, 19838, 19839, 19840, 19841,19842, 19879, 19880,19881, 19882, 19883, 19884,19885, 19886, 19887, 19988,19989, 20163, 20164, 20168,20169, 20260, 20261, 20262, 20263, 20264,20265, 20500, 20501, 20502, 20503, 20504, 20505, 20506, 20507, 20508, 20509, 20510, 20895, 20896, 20897, 20898, 20899, 21460, 21461, 21462/2011.1 to 3 respondent (W.P.19450, 19454/2011)entered between the petitioner and the 3rd Respondent as null andvoid besides directing the 3rd Respondent herein to refund theEarnest money deposit of the petitioner lying with the 3rdRespondent (W.P.No.20161, 20162, 20165, 20166,20167)entered between the petitioner and the 4th Respondent as null andvoid besides directing the first respondent herein to refund theEarnest money deposit of the petitioner lying with the 1strespondent.(W.P.19467 to 19471/2011, 20076, 20087, 20088, 20789,20790/2011)entered between the petitioner and the 1st Respondent as null andvoid besides directing the respondent herein to refund the Earnestmoney Deposit of the petitioner lying with the 1st Respondent.(W.P.18651, 18652, 18653, 18654, 18655, 18656,18657, 18658, 18659, 18660, 18663, 18664, 18665,18666, 18667, 18668, 18669, 18670, 18671, 18672,18673, 18819, 18820, 18821, 18822, 18823, 18824,18825/2011)entered between the petitioner and the 4th Respondent as null andvoid besides directing the respondent herein to refund the Earnestmoney deposit of the petitioner lying with the 4th Respondent (W.P.19892, 19893/2011)entered into between the petitioner and the respondent(W.P.20280/11) 1st respondent (W.P.20291/2011) as null and void andhit by the Principles of force majeure besides directing therespondent herein to refund the Earnest Money Deposit of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner lying with the first respondent. (W.P.20280/2011,20291/2011)W.P.No.19085, 19086 of 2011Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayingto issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents frominvoking the provisions of contract No.152 (INDENT NO.764)(W.P.19085/2011) contract No.95 (INDENT NO.770) (W.P.19086/2011)dated 7.2.2011 and consequently refrain the respondents fromdemanding any difference in price for the balance unlifted quantityof candy under the contract besides directing the respondentsherein to refund the Earnest money Deposit of the petitioner lyingwith the 1st respondent together with interest at the rate of 24%per annum.For Petitioner in:Mr.R.L.Ramani, Sr.Counselall writ petitionsfor Mr.P.J.Rishikesh,Mr.B.Raveendran,Mr.N.Umapathi,Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, &M/s.Aiyar and DoliaFor Respondents :Mr.M.S.Krishnan, Sr.Counsel,Cotton Corp. of India Ltd.forM/s.Sarvabhauman AssociateFor Respondent/:Mr.V.Parivallal,Ministry of Textiles,Senior Central Govt. CounselGovernment of IndiaCOMMON ORDERThe prayer in all these writ petitions is to declare theContract No.112 dated 6.1.2011 (in W.P.No.19447/2011) and similarcontracts, entered into between the petitioner and the thirdrespondent – M/s.Cotton Corporation of India Limited, as null andvoid and direct the respondents to refund the EMD of thepetitioners lying with the respondents 1 to 3.2.The brief facts necessary for disposal of these writpetitions are as follows:(a)The petitioners are doing the business of ginning ofcotton and spinning of yarn from cotton, both for export to foreigncountries and for the domestic market. Petitioners Companyapproached the third respondent Corporation for procurement ofcotton, which is the basic raw material for spinning industry.(b)Contracts of sale was entered into between the thirdrespondent and each of the petitioner on 6.1.2011 (inW.P.No.19447/2011) and on various dates. The terms of the contract https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ stipulates that the agreed quantity of purchase by the petitionersCompany shall be 7500 bales of cotton, for which the price wasfixed at Rs.43,800/- per candy. The payment condition entailed aminimum deposit of Rs.800/- per bale. The petitioners Company havepaid a total deposit of Rs.800/- per bale, which ultimately worksout to a total sum of Rs.60 lakhs. (c)According to the petitioner in W.P.No.19447 of 2011, outof 7,500 bales, they had taken delivery of 7000 cotton bales andtherefore a balance money of Rs.4,00,000/- is still with the thirdrespondent Corporation.(d)It is contended that the entire contract is nowfrustrated because of frequent power cuts that lasted for longhours, closure of Units in Tiruppur, and sudden ban on export ofcotton yarn to foreign countries by the Central Government. Due tothe said three reasons working hours in the factory has beendrastically reduced to one shift instead of normal three shifts andfour months production is held up and are lying idle. No paymentis received from buyers for the past few months. The creditworthiness of the business is under threat. Since normal shiftpattern was stopped, there is less production, leaving the balesalready lifted from the respondent as surplus.(e)It is the further contention of the petitioners thattherefore it is impossible to take the balance bales and use itcommercially. The petitioners are not responsible for the presentsituation and therefore the contracts entered into between thepetitioner and the respondents have become frustrated and thus theentire contract entered into between the petitioners and therespondents have become null and void due to mutuality.(f)The contract terms are one-sided, particularly Clause 13– Force Majeure Clause only helps the third respondent in adversesituation and does not mutually available. The petitioners wereforced to sign the contracts due to unequal bargaining power. TheForce Majeure Clause should be impliedly applied to the petitionersso as to give business efficacy to the contract. (g)The petitioners have jointly made joint memorandum on28.6.2011 to the second respondent Corporation and focussed theadverse situation. The third respondent Company being a CentralGovernment Company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956, isbound to consider the adverse situation, which is a nodal agency ofthe Central Government to undertake price support operations.(h)On 21.6.2011, the petitioner in W.P.No.19447 of 2011 hadwritten a letter to the first respondent explaining the gravesituation and requested cancellation/surrender of balance bales ofunlifted cotton as the rates offered by the Corporation was higherthan the amount contracted with the petitioners. On 30.6.2011 therespondents 1 to 3 threatened action that the deposited money andEMD deposited would be forfeited and unlifted cotton would be soldat the risk and cost of petitioners company and the loss, if any,would be recovered from the petitioners company. Therefore thepetitioners have filed these writ petitions. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (i)The contentions of the petitioners are that due to thepolicy decision taken by the Central Government banning export ofcotton yarn and availability of the product in the local market, itis impossible for the petitioners to lift the quantity for whichcontract was entered into with the respondent Corporation; that dueto power cut and closure of the Units in Tiruppur, the petitionersare not able to lift the cotton at the agreed price; and that thedoctrine of frustration has to be applied on the facts andcircumstances as the performance of the contract has been hampereddue to impossibility of performance, which has arisen after thecontract was entered into.3.These writ petitions are opposed by the CottonCorporation of India by filing common counter affidavit contendingas follows:(i)The Cotton Corporation of India (CCI) was setup in July,1970 by the Government of India as the only Public SectorUndertaking in the field of marketing of cotton. The Corporationis undertaking support price operations without any quantitativelimit whenever the prices of kapas (seed cotton) are ruling thebelow minimum support price. In the absence of support priceoperations, the Corporation undertakes commercial operations at itsown risk for supplying the cotton to NDC Mills, State TextileMills, Co-Operative Mills and private mills and for exportcommitments. For sale of FP bales, daily quotes along with termsand conditions of the sale of FP bales are displayed in the websiteof the respondent Corporation.(ii)The objection regarding maintainability of the writpetitions is raised in the counter affidavit contending that Clause12 of the contract entered into between the petitioners and therespondent Corporation contains an arbitration clause stating thatthe arbitration will be governed by the provisions of theArbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory amendmentor any reenactment, thereof. Sections 5 and 8 of the Arbitrationand Conciliation Act, 1996 restricts judicial intervention inmatters covered by arbitration agreement.(iii) Petitioners are trying to interpret the contract in thewrit petitions which is impermissible, particularly when thepetitioners are having a remedy to go for arbitration under theContract signed by the petitioners. (iv)It is also stated in the counter affidavit that thepetitioner mills are managed and administered by the professionalsconsisting of persons having immense knowledge in the business ofyarn manufacturing and marketing. They are carrying on thebusiness with the respondents Corporation for years together andthey are fully aware of the intricacies of the business. Theyhaving signed the contract with open eyes after reading the termsand conditions, it is unconscionable to raise these kinds ofcontentions in the writ petitions. Petitioners are trying towriggle out of the contract contending that now it is not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ commercially viable.(v)The alleged ground viz., frequent power cut, closure ofUnits in Tiruppur and ban on exports were very much prevailed whenthe petitioners entered into the contract. There is no change incircumstance and there is no total ban on exports and only aquantitative restriction to yarn exports was imposed. Thepetitioners were taking the cotton till the end of May, 2011 eventhough the price of cotton fell below the contract price. Therestriction to the export of cotton was also lifted with effectfrom 1.4.2011, which fact has been suppressed by the petitioners inthe affidavit filed in support of these writ petitions.(vi)In fact, the petitioners purchased cotton bales at alower rate from the Corporation, though the price had increased.Still the respondents did not increase the price but suppliedcotton bales as per the agreed terms. Clause 13 of the agreementis not one-sided as alleged.(vii) The Doctrine of Frustration will not apply in acommercial contract, where the parties are anticipating futurechange on price structure. Petitioners have taken delivery ofcotton bales till the end of May, 2011, without any demur as theprice was on the higher side. Only after the fall in price fromJune, 2011, petitioners are lodging their protest.(viii) The issue involves interpretation of contract enteredinto between the petitioner and the respondents, which can beeffectively dealt with only before the Arbitrator and in this case,arbitration clause is already there. Therefore Arbitrator can verywell interpret the contract.(ix)It is stated in the counter affidavit that thepetitioners are purchasing cotton at a lower rate from the openmarket and continuing their production and they are now opting outon account of the commercial calculations. The respondentsCorporation is procuring cotton from the farmers either at theminimum support price or at the market rate for the purpose ofensuring remunerative price to farmers. If the petitioners do nottake delivery of cotton as agreed, ultimately the farmers would beaffected and the respondent Corporation may not be in a position toprotect the interest of the farmers in the coming season. Theforfeiture of EMD is only as per the terms and conditions in thecontract. Therefore the writ petitions filed for declaration arenot maintainable on the ground of availability of alternate remedyof moving before the Arbitrator.4.Mr.R.L.Ramani, learned Senior Counsel appearing forpetitioners in most of the writ petitions reiterated thecontentions raised in the affidavits filed in support of the writpetitions and submitted that the contracts entered into between therespective petitioners and Cotton Corporation of India areunworkable due to three reasons viz., frequent power cut, closureof several Units in Tiruppur, and ban on exports, which were neveraccepted by the petitioners while signing the contract and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioners approached the respondents for taking effective stepsfor not lifting the cotton bales and give them fresh lease of lifeand the same having not been considered. The facts in these casesare not very much in dispute and hence this Court can entertain thewrit petitions, even though there is an alternate remedy of movingfor arbitration. The learned Senior Counsel relied on the judgmentof the Supreme Court reported in (2011) 5 SCC 697 (Union of Indiav. Tantia Construction (P) Ltd.) in support of his contentions,particularly stating that presence of arbitration clause is not abar to invoke writ jurisdiction when injustice is caused and ruleof law is violated. The learned Senior Counsel also relied on thedecision of the Supreme Court reported in (2010) 11 SCC 186(Central Bank of India v. Devi Ispat Ltd.) in support of hiscontentions. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that thepetitioners having been forced to sign the contract on dottedlines, cannot be sent out of this Court, particularly when theirrights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution ofIndia to carry on the business is affected. The learned SeniorCounsel also submitted that mere existence of alternate remedy ofgoing for arbitration will not disentitle the petitioners to filethese writ petitions.5.Heard Mr.R.Barath Kumar, learned counsel also for some ofthe writ petitioners.6.Mr.M.S.Krishnan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for therespondents 1 and 2 submitted that the CCI was formed by theGovernment of India to help the farmers to get good price for theircotton. It is procuring the cotton from the farmers and alsopaying advance to the farmers. During October, 2010 to February,2011 the contract entered into by the petitioners with CCI is forone year. Till June, 2011 the price of cotton was higher than theamount fixed in the contract and only in July, 2011 local price hasfallen. The power cut alleged by the petitioners are in existencefor the past two years. The closure of units in Tiruppur are onlydying units and not textile mills. There was no ban on exports ofcotton yarn as alleged in the affidavit and there was onlyrestricted export, which also was completely lifted by notificationdated 31.3.2011. Now the export of cotton yarn is free subject toregulation of export contracts with DGFC (Director General ofForeign Trade). The learned Senior Counsel relied on the CircularNo.07 dated 22.12.2010 issued by the Government of India, Ministryof Commerce and Industry and contended that the said circular onlyrestricted and not totally banned the export of cotton yarn. Thelearned counsel also submitted that as on date the price has goneup than the amount agreed between the parties. The petitioners areattempting to re-write the contract at its fag end period and morethan 50% of the agreed bales were already lifted by thepetitioners. The alleged frustration of contract will not arise ascontended by the petitioners. The learned Senior Counsel also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ relied on the judgments of the Supreme Court reported in (1996) 6SCC 22 (State of U.P.v.Bridge & Roof Company (I) Ltd.); (2007) 14SCC 680 : (2007) 4 ALR 74 (SC) (Empire Jute Company Limited v. JuteCorporation of India Limited); (2005) 8 SCC 242 (Sanjana M.Wig v.Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.); (2010) 11 SCC 186 (CentralBank of India v. Devi Ispat Ltd.); and AIR 1962 Madras 122(Mahalingaswami Devasthanam v. Sambanda Mudaliar) in support of hiscontentions and submitted that the writ petitions are notmaintainable, particularly when factual disputes are raised inthese writ petitions.7.I have considered the rival submissions made by thelearned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners as well aslearned Senior Counsels appearing for the respective respondents.8.The point arises for consideration in these writpetitions is as to whether the writ petitions filed seekingdeclaration to declare the contract entered into between thepetitioners and first respondent are maintainable and whether theEMD can be directed to be refunded ?9.In W.P.No.19447 of 2011 the contract was entered intobetween the petitioner and first respondent on 6.7.2011. Similarcontracts were entered into between the petitioners in other writpetitions and respondent Corporation for different periods. Clause12 of the terms of the contracts reads as follows:"In case of any dispute or difference arisingout of or in relation to the contract, exceptany dispute regarding the quality of cottonwhich is specifically excluded under clause 2of the Contract, will be referred to anArbitrator (other than an employee of theseller) to be appointed by the Director(Marketing) or the Director (Finance) of theSeller and the decision of the Arbitrator shallbe final and binding upon the parties hereto.The Arbitration will be governed by theprovisions of the Arbitration and ConciliationAct, 1996 or any statutory amendments or reenactment thereof."The agreed price per candy was fixed at Rs.43,800/- and thepetitioners agreed to buy 7500 bales of indigenous cotton on theterms and conditions set out. Each of the petitioners have signedin the contract. Therefore the petitioners are well aware of thefact that if any dispute arises for any reason if the contractcould not be completed as agreed upon, the parties can move forarbitration.10.Petitioners' contention is that due to the frequent powercut, closure of Units at Tiruppur and ban of export, the prices got https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ reduced in the open market and therefore they cannot lift thebalance cotton bales at present, at the rate of Rs.43,800/- percandy as agreed. The respondents in the counter affidavit as wellas the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents during the courseof the arguments submitted that the cotton was sold for higherprice till May, 2011 and only in July, 2011 a small price reductionwas noticed and now the price got stabilised; that as on today itis Rs.43,000/-, which may further increase; that the petitionershave lifted the cotton and benefitted out of the lower rate paid tothe Corporation; and that fluctuation of price is a commonphenomena, which is aware of to every businessman including thepetitioners and that is why a standard price was fixed. In suchcircumstances, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondentCorporation is justified in raising preliminary issue ofmaintainability of the writ petitions at the admission stage.11.As per the contract between the petitioners and therespondent Corporation, for resolving disputes arbitration isprovided (other than any dispute regarding quality of cotton, whichis specifically excluded under Clause 2). An Arbitrator other thanan employee of the Seller is to be appointed by the Director(Marketing) or the Director (Finance) of the Seller. SuchArbitration will be governed by the provisions of the Arbitrationand Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory amendments orreenactment thereof. Petitioners having agreed by signing the saidcontract, are bound to raise any dispute for arbitration and theArbitrator can very well go into all aspects, particularly in thefacts pleaded by the petitioners viz., frequent power cut, closureof Units in Tiruppur, ban of exports or any other reason, which maybe raised for consideration and an appropriate decision can bearrived at.12.(a)The Supreme Court in the decision reported in (2010)11 SCC 186 (Central Bank of India v. Devi Ispat Ltd.) held thatmandamus can be issued by the High Court under Article 226 of theConstitution, if a legal right exist and corresponding legal dutyis liable to be performed by the State or its instrumentality. Inparagraph 28 the Supreme Court held thus,"28. It is clear that (a) in the contractif there is a clause for arbitration, normally,a writ court should not invoke itsjurisdiction; (b) the existence of effectivealternative remedy provided in the contractitself is a good ground to decline to exerciseits extraordinary jurisdiction under Article226; and (c) if the instrumentality of theState acts contrary to the public good, publicinterest, unfairly, unjustly, unreasonablydiscriminatory and violative of Article 14 ofthe Constitution of India in its contractual or https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ statutory obligation, writ petition would bemaintainable. However, a legal right must existand corresponding legal duty on the part of theState and if any action on the part of theState is wholly unfair or arbitrary, writcourts can exercise their power. In the lightof the legal position, writ petition ismaintainable even in contractual matters, inthe circumstances mentioned in the earlierparagraphs."In the said decision the issue arose was for the return of titledeeds deposited in the bank after the settlement of accountsfurnished by the bank in full. Therefore the facts were not indispute.(b)In (2007) 14 SCC 680 : (2007) 4 ALR 74 (SC) (Empire JuteCompany Limited v. Jute Corporation of India Limited) in paragraph18 it is held thus,"18. The power of judicial review vestedin the superior courts undoubtedly has wideamplitude but the same should not be exercisedwhen there exists an arbitration clause. TheDivision Bench of the High Court took recourseto the arbitration agreement in regard to onepart of the dispute but proceeded to determinethe other part itself. It could have refused toexercise its jurisdiction leaving the partiesto avail their own remedies under the agreementbut if it was of the opinion that the disputebetween the parties being covered by thearbitration clause should be referred toarbitration, it should not have proceeded todetermine a part of the dispute itself."(c)In the decision reported in (2011) 2 SCC 782 (KanaiyalalLalchand Sachdev v. State of Maharashtra) the Apex Court held thatif disputed questions of facts arise in a given case andalternative remedy is provided, remedy under Article 226 of theConstitution of India cannot be permitted.(d)In AIR 1954 SC 44 : 1954 SCR 310 (Satyabrata Ghose v.Mugneeram Bangur and Co.), the doctrine of frustration wasconsidered. In para 20 it is held thus,"20. It is well settled and not disputedbefore us that if and when there is frustrationthe dissolution of the contract occursautomatically. It does not depend, as doesrecission of a contract on the ground ofrepudiation or breach, or on the choice orelection of either party. It depends on theeffect of what has actually happened on thepossibility of performing the contract. Whathappens generally in such cases and has https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ happened here is that one party claims that thecontract has been frustrated while the otherparty denies it. The issue has got to bedecided by the court “ex post facto, on theactual circumstances of the case”(e)In AIR 1960 SC 588 : (1960) 2 SCR 793 ((M/s.Alopi Parshadand Sons Ltd v. Union of India) in paragraph 21 doctrine offrustration was considered, which reads thus,"21. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Actprovides that:“A contract to do an act which, after thecontract is made, becomes impossible, or,by reason of some event which the promisorcould not prevent, unlawful, becomes voidwhen the act becomes impossible orunlawful.”Performance of the contract had not becomeimpossible or unlawful; the contract was infact, performed by the Agents, and they havereceived remuneration expressly stipulated tobe paid therein. The Indian Contract Act doesnot enable a party to a contract to ignore theexpress covenants thereof, and to claim paymentof consideration for performance of thecontract at rates different from the stipulatedrates, on some vague plea of equity. “Theparties to an executory contract are oftenfaced, in the course of carrying it out, with aturn of events which they did not at allanticipate — a wholly abnormal rise or fall inprices, a sudden depreciation of currency, anunexpected obstacle to execution, or the like.Yet, this does not in itself affect the bargainthey have made. If, on the other hand, aconsideration of the terms of the contract, inthe light of the circumstances existing when itwas made, shows that they never agreed to bebound in a fundamentally different situationwhich has now unexpectedly emerged, thecontract ceases to bind at that point — notbecause the court in its discretion thinks itjust and reasonable to qualify the terms of thecontract, but because on its true constructionit does not apply in that situation. When it issaid that in such circumstances the courtreaches a conclusion which is ‘just andreasonable' (Lord Wright in Constantine case orone ‘which justice demands' (Lord Sumner inHirji Mulji v. Cheong Yue Steamship Co. Ltd.), https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this result is arrived at by putting a justconstruction upon the contract in accordancewith an ‘implication ... from the presumedcommon intention of the parties'” — speech ofLord Simon in British Movietonews Ld. v. Londonand District Cinemas Ld."(f)In (1976) 2 SCC 167 (Bisra Lime Stone Co. v. Orissa StateElectricity Board) the Supreme court in paragraph 24 held that whenthere is arbitration, the parties should go for arbitration.(g)In (1996) 6 SCC 22 (State of U.P. v. Bridge & RoofCompany (India) Ltd.) in para 21 also the same view was taken,which reads thus,"21............ The contract in questioncontains a clause providing inter alia forsettlement of disputes by reference toarbitration (clause 67 of the contract). Thearbitrators can decide both questions of factas well as questions of law. When the contractitself provides for a mode of settlement ofdisputes arising from the contract, there is noreason why the parties should not follow andadopt that remedy and invoke the extraordinaryjurisdiction of the High Court under Article226. The existence of an effective alternativeremedy — in this case, provided in the contractitself — is a good ground for the court todecline to exercise its extraordinaryjurisdiction under Article 226. The saidarticle was not meant to supplant the existingremedies at law but only to supplement them incertain well-recognised situations. As pointedout above, the prayer for issuance of a writ ofmandamus was wholly misconceived in this casesince the respondent was not seeking to enforceany statutory right of theirs nor was itseeking to enforce any statutory obligationcast upon the appellants. Indeed, the veryresort to Article 226 — whether for issuance ofmandamus or any other writ, order or direction— was misconceived for the reasons mentionedsupra."13.From the above referred decisions it is evident that eventhough there is no absolute bar to entertain writ petition if thereis an arbitration clause, if the facts are in dispute, the HighCourt shall not entertain writ petition.14.In these cases, petitioners are contending that the priceof cotton bales is lesser than the agreed amount payable by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioners to the respondent and the ban order imposed was liftedby the Government of India and when the petitioners entered intocontract, then also there was frequent power cut. It is alsocontended by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondentCorporation that till May, 2011, cotton price was higher than theagreed amount payable by the petitioners and the petitioners haveearned profit and now also the cotton price has increased andtherefore there is fluctuation of price, which cannot be a reasonto contend frustration of contract. All the above factual aspectscan be raised only before the Arbitrator in an arbitrationproceeding, which is also provided under Clause 12 of the terms andconditions of the contract entered into between the respectivepetitioner and respondent Corporation.15.In view of the above findings, I am of the firm view thatthese writ petitions are not maintainable and the petitioners haveto go for arbitration in terms of clause 12 of the contract, ifthey have any grievance. Since the writ petitions are dismissedonly on the ground of maintainability, the observations made hereinor the contentions raised as stated in this order shall not beconstrued as giving any finding in favour of either party.The writ petitions are dismissed with liberty to move forarbitration. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are alsodismissed.vrSd/-Asst. Registrar//True Copy//Sub Asst. RegistrarTo1.M/s.The Cotton Corporation of India Limited,(A Government of India Undertaking,Ministry of Textiles)P.B.No.7103, No.1057, Trichy Road,Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore – 641 045.2.The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India Undertaking,Ministry of Textiles), Kapas Bhavan,Plot No:3A, Sector 10, Cbd Belapur,Navi Mumbai – 400 614 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.M/s.The Cotton Corporation of India Limited,(A Government of India Undertaking,Ministry of Textiles), Chandar Mouli Building,Plot No.27, Samrat Nagar, Veer Savarkar Chowk,Shahnoorwadi Road, Aurangabad – 431 005.4.The Secretary, Ministry of Textiles,Government of India, Udyog Bhavan,New Delhi – 110 011.5. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd., (A.Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles) Paraskar Tocoers Vidya Nagar,Akola-444 001.6. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)Kapas Bhavan, 27-A, Race Course Road,Indore-452 0037. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)11-25-32, A.N.R.Complex, II floor, Vasavi Colony Road,P.B.No.9, Warrangal-02.8. M/s.The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)Ruda Building, 5th Floor Jamnagar Road, Rajkot-360 001.9. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)4/2 Ashok Nagar, Guntur -522 002.10. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)GMR Tower Ist Floor, Cinema Road,Adilahad-504 001.11. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)Sakar-1,10th floor, Mr.Gandhigram Railway Station,Near Mehru Bridge, Ashram Road, Ahmedahad 380 009.12. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)3rd Floor, W.B.Plaza,New Cotton Market,Huhli-580 029. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

13. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)34, Main Sector, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara.14. The Cotton Corporation of India Ltd.,(A Government of India undertaking Ministry of Textiles)Constania, 3rd floor, 11, Dr.U.N.Brahmachari Street,Kolkata-700 017.+1cc to Mr.N.Raveendran, Advocate Sr 61555+2ccs to M/s.Aiyar & Dolia, Advocate Sr 61446,61737+1cc to Mr.N.Umapathi, Advocate Sr 61462+1cc to M/s. M.Christella, Advocate Sr 61863+1cc to Mr.J.Clemance, Advocate Sr 61887+2ccs to Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, Advocate Sr 61994, 61995+2ccs to mr.V.Parivallal, Advocate SR 61385CK & BKB(CO)SRA, EU, RH, TP,KM, SR/25.11.2011 Order inW.P.Nos.19447/2011 etc., batch(124 cases)