ANDRITZ OY REP Vs. ENMAS ENGINEERING PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an Application taken out by the first defendant in the Suit, under Section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking to refer the parties to the present Suit C.S. No.924 of 2006, to Arbitration, in accordance with the provisions contained in the Joint Venture Agreement dated 6.12.1995.

(2.) I have heard Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant/first defendant, Mr. Y.P. Narula, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent/plaintiff and Mr. N. Ramakrishnan appearing for the second respondent/second defendant.

(3.) ALONG with the Suit, the plaintiff had also taken out three Applications in O.A. Nos.977, 978 and 979 of 2006, seeking interlocutory orders of injunction, restraining the first defendant from interfering with the functioning of the second defendant -Company and from claiming any rights under the MOU dated 8.4.2003 or invoking the Arbitration Clause on the basis of the Joint Venture Agreement dated 6.12.1995. On 16.12.2006, notice was ordered in those Applications and after entering appearance and filing a counter -affidavit in those Applications, the first defendant has come up with the present Application under Section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.