BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. CHANDRA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main issue in the present appeal is as to whether the dispute between the tenant and landlord is arbitral in -spite of an arbitration clause incorporated in the lease -deed / rent note in view of the provisions of section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter 'the Act of 2001') which reads as under:

(2.) MR . Inderjeet Singh, learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the appellant BSNL submits that section 18(1) of the Act of 2001 confers exclusive jurisdiction on the jurisdictional Rent Tribunal to adjudicate the landlord - tenant's disputes. He submits that the exclusion of jurisdiction of Civil Court's in respect of landlord -tenant's dispute would also include the exclusion of arbitration proceedings in respect thereof as the Arbitrator exercises power under a contract with regard to the jurisdiction otherwise conferred on Civil Courts. Therefore the exclusionary impact on the Civil Court's jurisdiction would also attract to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator operating under the Act of 1996. In support of his contention Mr. Singh has placed reliance on National Textile Corporation & Ors v. Rent Control Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur & Ors., 2011 (3) WLC 458. Mr. S.P Sharma, Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Ankur Gupta, appearing for the respondent claimant - landlord (hereinafter 'the landlord') submits that the grounds raised in this appeal are absolutely dishonest and only to harass the landlord. He submits that in the first instance the landlord had indeed approached the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur under the provisions of the Act of 2001. Thereupon an objection was raised by the appellant BSNL that the lease deed in respect of the tenanted premises incorporated an arbitral clause and therefore the matter was arbitrable to the exclusion of the Civil Court's jurisdiction. Sr. Counsel submits that thereupon the learned Rent Tribunal, Jaipur vide order dated 18.8.2010 returned the eviction petition filed by the landlord requiring them to take his remedy under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1996'). The appellant BSNL itself then vide order dated 11.10.2010 appointed an Arbitrator.

(3.) COUNSEL however submitted that to eschew any delays in eviction proceedings taken by the landlord and in view of the case now set up before this Court by the appellant BSNL that the dispute is to be adjudicated under the provisions of the Act of 2001 he would concede in the present appeal but seek a direction that the eviction petition in respect of the tenanted premises as laid before the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur by the respondent landlord in the first instance be revived and adjudicated within a period of four months from the presentation of a certified copy of this order.