SUNITA SINGH Vs. RAMJEE SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid miscellaneous appeal and civil revision were taken up for analogous hearing because they have been preferred against the same order dated 10.4.1995 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Patna, in Title Suit No. 378 of 1994. The defendant of the suit is the appellant and revisionist in the aforesaid appeal and revision. The contention of the appellant before this court is that the aforesaid title suit was not maintainable under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. and, hence, it was prayed that the plaint of the suit be rejected under the aforesaid provision. The defendant -appellant (revisionist) had filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act for staying the proceedings of the suit because the concerned firm was not a registered one and hence the suit filed under the Arbitration Act was not maintainable. Both the prayers of the appellant were rejected by the impugned order and hence this appeal and the aforesaid revision.

(2.) IT was submitted by the appellants lawyer that admittedly the concerned firm (Annexure -1) of the revision and the appeal was not a registered one. So, no suit under the Arbitration Act could be filed before the Subordinate Judge. Hence, the plaint was to be rejected. The other prayer was for stay of the proceedings in view of the fact that under the terms of the Arbitration agreement (Annexure -1) the dispute was referable to the Arbitrator.

(3.) IT was further submitted that the learned Subordinate Judge rejected and dismissed the prayers of the appellant on the ground that the appellant appeared in the suit and prayed for time to file W.S. and thus she had submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. The learned Subordinate Judge did not consider the prayers of the appellant on merit.