MAHESH SHARMA Vs. MASKARA TEA ESTATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. G.N Sahewalla, learned senior counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The appellant and the respondent entered a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 22.02.2019, which provided that the respondent Maskara Tea Estate would be handed over to the appellant for a period from 01.01.2019 to 31.12.2019. Upon being handed over, the Tea Estate would be operated by the appellant and in lieu thereof certain amounts as stated in the MoU would be paid by the appellant to the respondent. In course of such arrangement between the parties, some dispute had arisen and in order to settle their dispute, the appellant preferred a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned District Judge, Sivasagar with the following prayers:-

(3.) The bone of contention was that the MoU required two complete sets of new Rotor Van, amongst others, to be provided by the respondent to the appellant, which apparently would be used by the appellant in course of their activities in the Tea Estate. The Section 9 petition of the appellant was given a consideration by the learned District Judge, Sivasagar by the judgment and order dated 19.08.2019, wherein certain prima-facie satisfaction was arrived at that the appellant had made certain defaults in making the payment and therefore was of the view that they had not come with clean hands and under the law of equity are not entitled to the relief claimed for in the Section 9 petition.