Judgment · High Court · 2008
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 Arb.A.No. 38 of 2006() ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/03/2006 IN IA.37/06 IN OS.1/2006 of DISTRICT COURT, KASARAGOD .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: ------------------------------------------------ M.C. ABDUL KHADER, S/O. ABBAS, MUSLIYAR HOUSE, CHENGALA VILAGE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: ---------------------------------- K. MOIDU, S/O. ABDULLA, KUDLU HOUSE, SIRIBAGILU VILLAGE, EDNAD POST, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN FOR R1 SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR FOR R1 THIS ARBITRATION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.-------------------------------ARB.A.NO.38 OF 2006 ()-----------------------------------Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008J U D G M E N TKOSHY,J.Appellant/petitioner approached the District Court byfiling an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration andConciliation Act 1996, for an interim injunction restraining therespondent from alienating the property.
Main contentiontaken by the respondent before the District Judge was thatthere was no arbitration clause and arbitration has notcommenced. Now it is submitted that an arbitrator wasappointed and arbitration started, and therefore, the aboveground is not applicable. At the time of the admission, thisCourt granted an interim stay, on condition that, no alienationcan be effected without permission from this Court. Now thearbitration has started. So, we dispose of the appealdirecting the arbitrator to dispose of the matter asexpeditiously as possible and parties may approach before the ARB.A.38/062arbitrator. Arbitrator has got power under Section 17 of theArbitration and Conciliation Act, to pass appropriate order asinterim measure untrammeled by the order passed by the trialcourt.
Status quo will continue till appropriate orders arepassed by the arbitrator or till passing of the award. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGEprp J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.--------------------------------------------------------M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 ()---------------------------------------------------------J U D G M E N T---------------------------------------------------------26th May, 2008
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration andConciliation Act, 1996 — s. 9; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 17.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 11 Jun 2008. The bench was P N RAVINDRAN, KOSHY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.