RABINDRA NATH ROY & ANR Vs. MONALISA SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this application is against the order no. 14 dated 5th December, 2016 read in the order no. 8 dated 27th July, 2017 passed by the Learned XIIIth Judge in Title Suit no. 35342 of 2014, inter alia, on the grounds that the learned Judge committed an error for not having considered the provisions of Section 11(6) of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 because under the said provision, it is of the Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Hon'ble Court or his designate has the jurisdiction to appoint arbitrator and a Judge of the City Civil Court has no jurisdiction to appoint any arbitrator as the arbitrator appointed by the parties did not commence, proceedings.

(2.) The learned Judge committed a gross miscarriage of justice ignoring said provision because even consent cannot confer jurisdiction to a judicial authority when a specific provision has been made conferring jurisdiction to specific judicial authority in appointing an arbitrator and as such the impugned order has been passed in excess of jurisdiction. Point for consideration is whether the learned Judge acted in execution of his jurisdiction and whether the order impugned is liable to be set aside.

(3.) This revisional application arises out of a suit for declaration and injunction filed by the plaintiff the present opposite party Smt. Monalisa Saha wife of Sri Sourav Saha daughter of Late Pranab Roy whereunder the plaintiff prayed for a decree of declaration that plaintiff is the only daughter of her father Late Pranab Kumar Roy and as such she should be created as one of the partners of the partnership business of M/s. Bhupati Charan in terms of deed dated 7th day of April, 1990 and that the plaintiff being a partner of the said business is entitled to receive the profit of the business.