ABHINANDAN HAZARIKA Vs. ASHOKANANDA INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTION AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred against the order dated 15.07.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge No. 3, Kamrup (Metro) in Misc (J) Case No. 23 of 2014 arising out of T.S. No. 392 of 2013, whereby the learned Civil Judge on application filed by the Opposite parties under Sec. 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, referred the parties to arbitration. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties.

(2.) Petitioner's case is that there was also a Tripartite Agreement between the opposite parties and the petitioner along with United Bank of India (Opposite Party No. 4) which provides the creation of Equitable Mortgage of the flat and that payment will be made through bank to be repaid by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner through Opposite Party No. 4, bank paid Rs. 57 Lakhs to the Principal Opposite Parties. It was the petitioner's case that the Principal Opposite Parties took some signature of the petitioner on some Non -Judicial Stamp papers on the pretext of using the same for getting electric connection. But subsequently, the Principal Opposite Parties fraudulently used those Non -Judicial Stamp papers showing cancellation of agreement and repayment of advance amount to the petitioner. The petitioner then filed the Title Suit for specific performance of contract and khas possession with prayer for pass a decree of Specific Performance of contract directing the principal defendants -

(3.) Petitioner in his objection to the petition filed under Sec. 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act contended that the agreement also provides option to the party, for resolution of dispute either through arbitration or adjudication by any competent Court at Guwahati.