GHYANSHYAMDAS BAHETI Vs. JAMUNA TRANSPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three plaintiffs who are respondents Nos.l, 2 and 3 in the present appeal, filed a suit being C.S. No. 24 of 2010 against the appellant and respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 praying for the following reliefs:

(2.) As usual, the plaintiffs took out an interlocutory application being G.A. No. 379 in aid of the reliefs in the suit. By the interlocutory application, the plaintiffs, inter alia, had prayed for an order of injunction restrain ing the defendants in the Suit from taking any step or further step on the basis of the notice dated November 24, 2010, an order of injunction restraining the defendants Nos. 1 to, 3 from proceeding with the purported arbitration before the defendant No. 4, an order of injunction directing the defendants Nos.l, 2 and 3 to disclose the purported arbitration agreement dated March 15, 2007.

(3.) Initially, by an ex parte order dated February 11, 2010, the defendants were restrained from proceeding any further with the purported reference before the defendant No. 4 and the said order further directed the defendants to produce the arbitration agreement. The interim order was extended thereafter from time to time, directions for affidavit were given and the original Memorandum of Understanding was directed to be kept on the record. Ultimately, by judgment and order dated July 16, 2010 the learned Trial Judge allowed the interlocutory application being G. A. No. 379 of 2010 by restraining the first three defendants from acting in pursuance of the purported arbitration agreement contained in the Memorandum of Understanding, dated March 15, 2007 in any manner whatsoever. This order has been impugned in the present appeal.