PENUMALLI SULOCHANA Vs. HARISH RAWTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 172 of 2012 on the file of II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, filed this revision feeling aggrieved by the order dated 03-08-2012 passed in I.A. No. 1494 of 2012, filed by the respondent-defendant. The petitioner is the owner of the premises bearing No. 8-2-293/82/A/796-A in an area of 1,162 square yards of Road No. 36, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. The same was leased out to the respondent for a period of five (05) years through a lease deed dated 06-12-2006. After expiry of the period of lease, the petitioner got issued a notice dated 22-02-2012 under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (for short "the Act"). Alleging that the respondent did not vacate the premises even after receipt of notice, the petitioner filed the suit for eviction of the respondent, for recovery of arrears of rent, and damages for use and occupation.

(2.) On receipt of summons in the suit, the respondent filed I.A. No. 1494 of 2012 under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with a prayer to dismiss the suit and refer the matter to arbitration. He pleaded that the lease deed dated 06-12-2006 contains a clause providing for arbitration of the dispute, if any, between the parties and in that view of the matter, the suit is not maintainable.

(3.) The petitioner filed a counter opposing the interlocutory application. She pleaded that the subject matter of the suit is not a dispute arising out of the lease deed and that the suit was filed only after expiry of the period stipulated in the lease deed. It was pleaded that the application was filed only with a view to defeat the rights of the petitioner to seek the remedy provided for, in law.