AYAZ AHMED Vs. SHAMIM ANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition has been filed by the Plaintiff against the order dated December 21, 2004 passed by Additional District Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan ordering the return of the plaint for filing the same before the appropriate authority, as there existed an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties.

(2.) The facts, which are relevant for the decision of the present revision petition, are that a suit for declaration and permanent and mandatory injunction was filed by Ayaz Ahmed Plaintiff against the Defendants. In the said suit a reference was made to the agreement dated 28th April, 1997, vide which the Defendants had financed the vehicle (Tata truck) of the Plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 4,30,000/-. It was alleged that the Defendants had illegally snatched the said vehicle from the Plaintiff even though they had no right to do so. It was alleged that the acts of the Defendants in snatching the vehicle were illegal and void and that the Plaintiff was entitled to the release of the said vehicle on paying the instalments as per the aforesaid agreement and the Defendants be restrained from interfering in the plying of the said vehicle by the Plaintiff. In the alternative, it was prayed that a decree for Rs. 4,50,000/- along with interest be passed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants, towards the damages suffered by the Plaintiff, in this regard. This suit was filed on July 21, 1999.

(3.) After being served in the said suit, Defendant No. 2 M/s. Tata Finance Ltd., filed application dated November 27, 1999, under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') with a prayer that the parties may be ordered to be referred to the Arbitrator for arbitration in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. In the said application it was alleged that the Plaintiff had entered into a hire purchase agreement dated April 29, 1997 with the Defendants in respect of truck in question which was the subject matter of the present suit. Attested copy of hire purchase agreement dated April 29, 1997 was attached along with the said application. It was further alleged that as per the said hire purchase agreement dated April 29, 1997 and condition No. 25 of the terms and conditions of the said agreement, the Plaintiff had agreed to refer all the disputes and differences to the Arbitrator to be nominated by the applicants-Defendants. Clause 25 of the said agreement was reproduced in para 4 of the application. It was further alleged that up till date the Plaintiff had not made any request for referring the dispute, which had arisen between the parties, arising out of the aforesaid agreement to the Arbitrator. It was accordingly prayed that the parties be ordered to be referred to the Arbitrator for arbitration, as per the terms and conditions of the said agreement.