HDFC BANK LIMITED Vs. BHAGWANDAS AUTO FINANCE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three petitions involve identical questions and the parties agree that a decision on one will equally govern the other two matters. The papers relating to AP No. 633 of 2008 have been taken up, though an affidavit-in-reply used by the petitioner in AP No. 635 of 2008 has also been referred to herein.

(2.) Under three several agreements, of identical import, the petitioner financed several vehicles or equipment to the respondents. Following disputes and differences having arisen in respect of the subject matter of the three agreements, the petitioner has invoked the arbitration agreement in each case and has brought the present proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. There is an interim order subsisting in each case.

(3.) The respondents have canvassed identical grounds for dismissal of the three petitions. They say that since the petitioner is a bank which is governed by the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 in respect of its claims against its constituents, it is only such Act that may be invoked for the furtherance of any claim of the petitioner bank under any of the subject agreements. They suggest that a combined reading of Sections 17, 18 and 34 of the 1993 Act would preclude any arbitration reference being made in respect of the transaction covered by the agreements.