TONGANI TEA COMPANY LIMITED Vs. ROSSELL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S.N. Mitra, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by advocates Mr. G. Khetan and Mr. M. Choudhury appearing for the petitioner. The respondent is represented by learned Counsel Mr. A. Roy and Mr. V.V.V. Sastri.

(2.) Through this application under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Arbitration Act") the petitioner prays for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute arising out of the agreement dated 14.9.1999 (Annexure-B). Through this agreement executed by the petitioner under its previous name 'M/s Derby Tea & Industries Limited' and the respondent 'Rossell Tea Limited', the petitioner had agreed to transfer the Nagrijuli Tea Estate for a total consideration of Rs.18.00 crores. The consideration amount was payable in a phased manner and after possession of the T.E. is delivered, the respondent was required to bear the expenses for managing the T.E. w.e.f. 11.10.1999 i.e. the date of delivery of possession. The record shows that between 29.9.1999 to 31.3.2000, Rs.17.5 crores was paid by the respondent but the balance amount of Rs.50 lakh is not yet paid.

(3.) Earlier the petitioner filed the Money Suit 3/2003 in the Court of the District Judge, Nalbari for recovery of the balance consideration. But the learned District Judge through his order dated 17.2.2004 (Annexure-J) after considering the objection of the defendant and bearing in mind the forum selection clause in the agreement of 14.9.1999 held that although the subject matter of the suit is situated within the jurisdiction of the Court, the Court at Nalbari has no jurisdiction to try the suit. Accordingly the plaint was returned to the plaintiff under Order 7 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. for presentation in the proper Court. But after this decision the petitioner didn't proceed further to recover the balance consideration.