SHARAD DOGRA Vs. SAHARA AIRLINES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff herein is a pilot by profession and is currently employed with Air India Chartered Limited, a public limited company, which flies aircrafts of Air India Express. Prior to this, he was in the employment of defendant No.1 company, namely, M/s. Sahara Airline Limited, where he served from 3.3.2004 till 19.4.2005 when he resigned from the services of the defendant No.1 company and joined the present employer. However, disputes have arisen out of his employment with the defendant No.1 company. The reason is his resignation. The plaintiff states that he was compelled to resign because of non-fulfillment of the assurances and promises held out by the defendant No.1 company. The defendant No.1 company, in reply to resignation dated 19.4.2005 responded vide communication dated 23.4.2005 rejecting this request of resignation. The defendant No.1 company also treated it as breach of the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant No.1 company and demanded payment of compensation/damages vide legal notice dated 6.5.2005. According to the defendant No.1 company, it had suffered loss of Rs.2,54,60,566/- and this amount was demanded from the plaintiff as well as the defendants No.2 and 3, who had executed surety bond for faithful discharge of duties by the plaintiff. Thereafter, the defendant No.1 company appointed Mr. Justice R.K. Aggarwal, a retired Judge of Allahabad High Court, as the arbitrator to adjudicate upon the claims of the defendant No.1 company. The plaintiff received an order from the learned arbitrator intimating that arbitration proceedings had commenced against the plaintiff and the defendants No.2 and 3, which was received by the plaintiff on 13.6.2005. The plaintiff states that he was surprised to receive this letter. He then immediately contacted his colleagues and co-pilots and was informed that a letter dated 28.5.2005 was passed by the defendant No.1 company appointing Mr. Justice R.K. Aggarwal (Retd.) as the arbitrator. Prior to that, notice dated 25.5.2005 was received by other pilots by which the defendant No.1 company had invoked the arbitration clause. The plaintiff says that he did not receive any such notice dated 25.5.2005 invoking the arbitration or order of appointment dated 28.5.2005. After collecting those documents from the other pilots, who had been sent the same letters, present suit is filed by the plaintiff challenging the appointment of arbitration and the arbitral proceedings.

(2.) Following reliefs are prayed:-

(3.) The first application (IA No.9764/2005) is filed by the defendant No.1 company under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint being barred by law, as there is a valid arbitration agreement between the parties and, therefore, suit is not maintainable. The other application (IA No.9765/2005) is filed by the plaintiff under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC read with Section 151 CPC with a prayer that judgment and decree, as prayed for in this suit, be passed as the defendant No.1 company has failed to file the written statement within the statutory period prescribed by law.