DILIP SINGH SINGHAVI Vs. SHEKH MOHSIN HASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dtd. 3/1/2015 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Jodhpur Metro No.1, Jodhpur in Civil Original Suit No.08/2014 whereby the application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC as preferred by the defendants had been rejected.

(2.) In a suit preferred by the plaintiffs for permanent and mandatory injunction, an application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC was preferred by the defendants with the submission that the agreement as entered into between the parties provides for an arbitration clause for resolution of disputes. Hence, there being a specific arbitration clause, the present suit cannot be entertained by the Civil Court. The said application as preferred by the defendants has been rejected by the Court below on the ground that the agreement in question is insufficiently stamped and hence, the same cannot be acted upon for the purpose of reference to arbitration.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents informed this Court that while moving an application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC before the Civil Court in the suit, the defendants simultaneously preferred an application under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') for appointment of an arbitrator and the said application being S.B. Arbitration Application No.03/2017 (Dilip Singhavi vs. Shekhaddin Mohemmad) has also been dismissed on 20/4/2018. Learned counsel submitted that after rejection of the application for appointment of arbitrator, the ground if any, even otherwise, does not survive. Learned counsel placed on record the order dtd. 20/4/2018 passed in S.B. Arbitration Application No.03/2017.