Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Himangni Enterprises Versus Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia

2017 (10) TMI 566 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Arbitration and Conciliation proceedings - whether the two Courts below were justified in rejecting the application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in a pending civil suit filed by the respondent seeking appellant's eviction from the premises in question and for claiming some ancillary reliefs therein - Held that:- Both the Courts below were right in dismissing the appellant's application filed under Section 8 of the Act and thereby were justified in holding t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed 27.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in F.A.O. No.344 of 2016 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein and upheld the order dated 11.04.2016 of the Additional District Judge-05, South East Dist., Saket Courts, New Delhi in C.S. No. 132 of 2016. 3. The question involved in the appeal is short. It arises on the facts, which lie in a narrow compass. 4. The question, which arises for consideration in this appeal, is whether the two Courts belo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

C.S. No. 132/2016 against the appellant on 17.08.2015 in the Court of ADJ-05, South East Dist., Saket Courts, New Delhi. 7. The suit is filed essentially to seek appellant's eviction from Shop No. SF-2 measuring around 317.29 Sq. ft. situated at 2nd floor in a Commercial Complex known as "Omaxe Square" in Block No.14, Non-Hierarchy Commercial Center, District Center Jasola, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the suit premises") and for recovery of unpaid arrears of rent and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rted from 1st of every month and ended on the last day of each month. 9. The appellant, on being served with the notice of the civil suit, filed an application under Section 8 of the Act. According to the appellant, since the suit was founded on the lease deed dated 31.08.2010, which contained an arbitration clause (9.8) for resolving the dispute arising out of the lease deed between the parties, and when admittedly the disputes had arisen in relation to the suit premises, the same were governed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which the civil suit is filed arise out of the lease deed dated 31.08.2010 which contained an arbitration clause (9.8) for their adjudication through the arbitrator, the civil suit to get such disputes decided by the Civil Court was barred. 11. The respondent opposed the application essentially on two grounds. First, the lease period initially fixed in the lease deed having come to an end by efflux of time, such lease deed was no longer enforceable by the appellant and second, the disputes, whi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ieved, filed appeal before the High Court. 13. By impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the Trial Court giving rise to filing of the special leave to appeal by the defendant (appellant herein) before this Court. 14. Heard Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel for the respondent. 15. Though learned senior counsel for the appellant (defendant) argued the point involved in the appeal at great l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

013) 3 Mh.L.J. 250 contending that the application filed by the appellant under Section 8 of the Act should have been allowed by the Courts below and the respondent should have been relegated to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of an arbitrator in terms of clause 9.8 of the lease deed for determination of the disputes by the arbitrator instead of filing the civil suit for their determination by the Civil Court. 16. In reply, learned senior counsel for the respondent(plaintiff) supported the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mp; Hamilton Inc. vs. SBI Home Finance Ltd. & Ors., (2011) 5 SCC 532 against the appellant and in favour of the respondent. 19. So far as Natraj Studio s case (supra) is concerned there also, the landlord had filed a civil suit against the tenant in the Small Causes Court, Bombay claiming therein the tenant's eviction from the leased premises. There also, the tenant was inducted pursuant to "leave and license" agreement executed between the landlord and the tenant. 20. The tena .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the civil suit was, therefore, not maintainable and the disputes for which the suit has been filed be referred to the arbitrator for their adjudication. 21. This Court (Three Judge Bench) speaking through Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy rejected the application filed by the tenant under Section 8 of the Act and held, inter alia, that the civil suit filed by the landlord was maintainable. It was held that the disputes of such nature cannot be referred to the arbitrator. 22. This is what Their Lordsh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or landlord is entitled to seek possession of the two Studios and other premises together with machinery and equipment from the appellant-licensee tenant. That this is the real dispute between the parties is abundantly clear from the petition filed by the respondents in the High Court of Bombay, under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act seeking a reference to Arbitration. The petition refers to the notices exchanged by the parties, the respondent calling upon the appellant to hand over possession o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

len & Hamilton Inc. (supra), this Court (two Judge Bench) speaking through R.V.Raveendran J. laid down the following proposition of law after examining the question as to which cases are arbitrable and which are non-arbitrable: 36. The well-recognised examples of non-arbitrable disputes are: (i) disputes relating to rights and liabilities which give rise to or arise out of criminal offences; (ii) matrimonial disputes relating to divorce, judicial separation, restitution of conjugal rights, c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o decisions and applying the same to the facts of this case, we have no hesitation to hold that both the Courts below were right in dismissing the appellant's application filed under Section 8 of the Act and thereby were justified in holding that the civil suit filed by the respondent was maintainable for grant of reliefs claimed in the plaint despite parties agreeing to get the disputes arising therefrom to be decided by the arbitrator. 25. Learned counsel for the appellant, however, argued .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version