SARASWATHI MILLS LIMITED Vs. GOVINDJI JEVAT AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have entered into two contracts with the respondents for the purchase of 700 and 500 bales of cotton. THE first contract for the purchase of 700 bales of cotton was dated 16-5-1977, and there was a second contract entered into on 27-5-1977, for the purchase of 500 bales of cotton. THE respondents are members of the East India Cotton Association Ltd., and both the contracts were entered into subject to the bye-laws of the East India Cotton Association Ltd. THE petitioners are not members of this Association. However, the bye-laws provided for arbitration in respect of disputes between members and non-members also. THE respondents carry on business at Bombay while the petitioners have their registered office at Madurai. THE contracts were for the supply of cotton from Bombay for delivery at Tiruttani.

(2.) THERE were disputes between the parties in respect of these two contracts. The respondents referred their disputes to arbitration under bye-law 38 of the East India Cotton Association Ltd. The respondents called upon the petitioners to appoint their own arbitrator under the bye-laws. THERE upon on 16-5-1978, the petitioners filed a petition under section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai, being C.P. No. 82 of 1978, inter alia, for a declaration that there was no second contract between the parties dated 27-5-1977, and for a declaration that there did not exist any arbitration agreement in respect of the transaction covered by the said second contract. By his order dated 24-7-1979, the learned Subordinate Judge, Madurai dismissed the petition. A revision application being Civil Revision Application No. 2183 of 1979, which was filed by the petitioners from the said order in the Madras High Court, was dismissed by the High Court on 1-7-1981.

(3.) IN paragraph 17 of the petition it has been stated that the award has been filed in Bombay ; the respondents are carrying on business at Bombay and "The petitioner submits that this Honble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain and try this petition". The learned Advocate for the petitioners gave a notice dated 23-6-1983 to the learned Advocate for the respondents to the following effect :