KHAIRUDDIN Vs. INSPECTOR OF WORKS CENTRAL RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five Second Appeals arise under similar set of circumstances in all respects. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.

(2.) The appellants were granted licences in respect of the vacant land belonging to the respondents (Railways), in the year 1977. It is the case of the appellants that with the permission of the respondents, they have made constructions and have been using the same. In the year 1988, the respondents terminated the licences granted to the appellants. The appellants filed W.P.No. 753 of 1998 and batch challenging the proceedings of termination of licences. The writ petitions were dismissed. They preferred writ appeals. A Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ appeals also. One of the contentions raised by the appellants were that the documents under which they were granted licences provide for arbitration and that the same has not been resorted to. That aspect was left open by the Division Bench.

(3.) The appellants filed O.P.No. 20 of 1990 and batch, in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad, under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, for appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 28 of the Deed of Licence (Ex. B-l in the present proceedings). The trial Court dismissed the same holding that there was no referable dispute.