CLASSIC MOTORS LIMITED Vs. MARUTI UDOG LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under section 20 of the Arbitration Act filed by the petitioner against the respondents seeking for an order to the respondents to file the agreement dated 15.1.1988 as modified by communication dated 23.2.1988 and on filing of the said agreement the disputes/ Differences arising between the parties out of the said agreement and enumerated in the petition be referred to arbitration in terms of arbitration clause No. 36 contained in the said agreement

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a dealer by the respondent No. 1 and a dealership agreement dated 15.1.1988 was executed between the parties. The said dealership agreement contained an arbitration clause being clause No.36 wherein it is stated that if any dispute and difference arises between the parties as to the construction or true intent and meaning of any of the terms and conditions contained in the agreement or as to any payment to be made in pursuance thereof or to any other matter arising out of or in connection therewith or incidental thereto such differences or Disputes shall be referred to the Tribunal of Arbitration of Indian Chambers of Commerce, Delhi.

(3.) The petitioner received a communication dated 6.4.1991 from respondent No. 1 alleging various violations on the part of the petitioner of the sales policy of the respondent. It is stated that the petitioner has not violated any sales policy of respondent No. 1 and that even if any such violation had occurred of the provisions of the sales policy, the said sale policy not being a part of the contract between the parties, the same gives rise to disputes between the parties, which could be adjudicated upon by the arbitrator in accordance with the aforesaid arbitration clause.