K S KRISHNAN Vs. S RAVICHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 23-8-1995 passed by the XII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore in O. S. No. 423/95 allowing I. A-II filed by the respondent under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

(2.) ). The appellant and the respondents are the partners. The appellant-plaintiff has filed the suit for injunction. Before filing the written statement, the respondents-defendants have filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 stating that both the appellant and the respondents are party to the agreement to be referred to the Arbitration in the event of any dispute. Taking the advantage of this clause, the defendants filed the application and the lower Court has allowed this application stating that there is a dispute between the partners as such, it should be referred to the arbitrator and inter alia suit is also stayed.

(3.) MR. Visweswara, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since it is only a suit for bare injunction; there is no dispute except the grievance that the appellant was not allowed to participate in the day today affairs of the company. He also relied upon two decisions viz. Banwarilal Aggarwal v. Subhas Gupta (MFA No. 972/94) (Unreported) and also another decision in the case of National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. , New Delhi v. M/s. Punjab Tin Printing and Metal Industries Ajraunda, AIR 1979 Delhi 58. On the other hand Mr. Yeshmishra vehemently argued that since the appellant has filed the suit, it presupposes that there is a dispute and moreover according to him there is a clause in the agreement that in case of any dispute arising between the partners, the matter should be referred to the arbitrator. He also relied upon the decision in the case of Jammu Forest Co. v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1968 J and K 86 wherein it is stated as follows :