MANIK PAIK Vs. NARU GOPAL DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisionist is aggrieved by an order dated 13th March, 2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court at Contai in T.S. No.207 of 2016. By the said order the Court below had rejected the plaintiff/opposite party's application for continuation of interim order and the revisionist's application for stay of further proceedings in the suit for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(2.) The revisionist would argue before me that the plaintiff, the revisionist and a third party entered into an agreement for running a brick field business in partnership, in the name and style of 'Gobinda Brick Field' pursuant to an agreement dated 26th July, 2002. The said agreement contained an arbitration clause. The said deed of partnership was re-constituted from time to time and finally in the year 2009 one Suvendu Sekhar Maji retired from the partnership business and the same was re-constituted with one Naru Gopal Das and the revisionist as partners.

(3.) The opposite party/plaintiff's calls himself Naru Gopal Das and submits that he is not a party to such an agreement and/or alleged re-constitution and that his signatures have been forged thereon.