(1.) This order of mine shall dispose of seven revision petitions bearing CR No.1517 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Amrish Kumar Bansal and another", CR No.1518 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Yogesh Mittal", CR No.1519 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Navraj Mittal", CR No.1520 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Sanjesh R. Dhull, CR No.1521 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Shri Shyam Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.", CR No.1522 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Navraj Mittal " and CR No.1523 of 2018 titled as "M/s Samar Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another V/s Sanjesh R. Dhall and another", filed against the impugned order, whereby an application submitted by the petitioners for rejection of the petition under Sec. 22(C) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (in short 'the 1987 Act'), containing the arbitration clause, has been dismissed.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents had booked apartment and entered into an agreement to sell with the petitioners (Annexure P-3) and Clause 46 of the agreement contained a resolution of dispute, if any, through arbitration, but despite the adjudication of the dispute, the respondents filed the application under Sec. 22(C) of the 1987 Act for settlement of dispute between the parties. In fact, the respondents did not pay the installment and they were defaulters. In such circumstances, an application under Sec. 8 of the 1996 Act was filed, but the same was dismissed on the premise that the provisions of Sec. 8 of the 1996 Act would not applicable to the proceedings.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and appraised the paper book and of the view that there is force and merit in the submissions of Mr. Arshdeep Bhullar.