MA DURGA SERVICE STATION & ORS. Vs. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. CAL. REGIONAL OFFICE (RETAIL) & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This mandamus -appeal is at the instance of an unsuccessful writ -petitioner and is directed against the order dated 9th June, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge by which His Lordship refused to entertain the Writ -application on the ground of existence of an efficacious alternative remedy by way of arbitration agreement between the parties. The writ -petitioner, a partnership firm, being represented by one of its partners has alleged that it is a dealer of diesel and petrol under the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, the respondent herein, and that it had passed an order suspending the sale and supply of petrol and diesel and thereafter, issued a notice to show -cause why the agreement of dealership between the parties should not be terminated on the ground of tampering of the metering units and totaliser units. The writ -petitioner, in the past filed another writ -application before this Court challenging such notice to show -cause. A learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 8th February, 2006 directed the appellant to submit its reply to the show -cause notice dated 4th February, 2006 with further direction upon the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited to take appropriate decision.

(2.) Subsequently, the respondent authority by the order dated 11th February, 2006 terminated the dealership -agreement between the parties on the aforesaid ground and the appellant was directed to hand over the belongings of the respondent Corporation including the premises to the concerned Sales Officer of the Corporation.

(3.) Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order dated 11th February, 2006 passed by the Chief Regional Manager (Retail) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) the appellant moved a further writ -application before the learned Single Judge and by the order impugned herein, His Lordship has dismissed the said writ -application on the ground that the appellant had efficacious alternative remedy by way of arbitration as provided in the agreement between the parties. His Lordship, however, made it clear that the findings on merit recorded in the body of the order impugned were made for the purpose of disposal of the said writ -application and should not prejudice any of the parties, either before the arbitrator or before any competent Court.