Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Esteem Infrabuild Pvt Ltd Through ... vs The M P State Mining Corporation Ltd on 9 July, 2025
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:14087
1 CR-377-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 9 th OF JULY, 2025
CIVIL REVISION No. 377 of 2025
M/S ESTEEM INFRABUILD PVT LTD THROUGH AUTHORIZED
SIGNATORY MANISH SARASWAT
Versus
THE M P STATE MINING CORPORATION LTD
Appearance:
Shri Shiv Shankar Bansal - Advocate for applicant.
Shri Arun Dudawat - Advocate for respondent.
ORDER
This application under Section 115 of the CPC has been filed against the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by XXIV Civil Judge Junior Division, Gwalior in RCSB No.9/2022 by which an application filed by applicant under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act has been rejected.
2. It is submitted by counsel for applicant that plaintiff/respondent has filed a civil suit for recovery of Rs.3,08,547/- on the ground that State Government had allotted sand quarry to the plaintiff situated at Survey No.158 ad-measuring 17.456 of land in Village Gaghota/Kupeda, Tahsil Bhitarwar, District Gwalior. Thereafter in accordance with terms and conditions of allotment, plaintiff invited tenders for giving contract for sale of sand from said sand quarry and defendant submitted his letter of acceptance dated 08.07.2015. Accordingly, an agreement was executed on 26.12.2016. After extracting the sand for a considerable long time, defendant Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHID KHAN Signing time: 7/10/2025 11:19:28 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:14087 2 CR-377-2025 submitted an application dated 01.11.2017. Thereafter on 14.11.2017 defendant submitted an application seeking permission to withdraw his application filed on 01.11.2017. Again defendant submitted an application on 27.12.2017 surrendering the mine in question for reason of his inability to run the same. Acting upon the request of defendant in terms of Clause 2.22 of agreement, plaintiff accepted the request of defendant by letter dated 10.06.2021 on certain conditions. In spite of service of letter dated 10.06.2021 defendant has not deposited the amount of Rs.1,40,249/-.
3 . In nutshell, it was the case of plaintiff that defendant has acted in violation of terms and conditions of agreement. Accordingly, suit for recovery of Rs.3,08,547/- has been filed by respondent.
4 . Applicant filed an application under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act before Trial Court raising question of maintainability of suit on the ground of Arbitration Clause. By impugned order, Trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that a money recovery suit has been filed, therefore, it is not barred.
5 . Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6 . Admittedly, terms and conditions of the agreement contains arbitration clause. Copy of agreement has been placed on record as Annexure A/5 and Arbitration Clause reads as under:-
" ववाद का िनपटाराः - िनगम एवं बोलीकता के म य िन पा दत अनुब ध से स ब धत कसी ववाद के िनराकरण हे तु ववाद उ प न होने के सात दवस के भीतर बोलीकता ारा िनगम के बंध संचालक को औपचा रक प से िल खत म ववाद का सारभूत अिधसूिचत कया जावेगा। अिधसूिचत करने के तीस दवस के भीतर िनगम के बंध संचालक स ब धत प क सुनवाई कर इसका िनराकरण कर सकगे। य द िनगम के बंध संचालक 30 दवस म उ ह संदिभत कये गये ववाद का समाधान करने म असमथ रहते ह तब ऐसी थित म या बोलीकता बंध संचालक ारा िन णत समाधान से संतु न हो तो ओ बटे शन ए ड क सीिलयेशन ए ट 1996 के अ तगत स ब धत प ारा ववाद पंच िनणय हे तु तुत कया जायेगा एवं पंच ारा विध स मत िनणय दोन प को मा य होगा । "Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHID KHAN Signing time: 7/10/2025 11:19:28 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:14087 3 CR-377-2025 7 . It is fairly conceded by counsel for respondent that applicant/defendant has also filed an application under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act before High Court which is registered as A.C. No.102/2024.
8 . Accordingly, it is submitted by counsel for respondent that with liberty to pursue that application, he has no objection in case if plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 readwith Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
9. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties.
10. In view of Arbitration Clause as contained in the agreement as well as in view of pendency of A.C. No.102/2024 by which applicant/defendant has prayed for appointment of Arbitrator, coupled with the fact that counsel for defendant has also agreed that he may be permitted to pursue the Arbitration Case No.102/2024, this revision is allowed and order dated 17.02.2025 is hereby set aside and plaint is rejected on the ground of availability of arbitration clause.
11. However, this order will not come in the way of Arbitration Case No.102/2024 and the said case shall be decided on its own merits without getting influenced by this order.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Rashid Signature Not Verified Signed by: RASHID KHAN Signing time: 7/10/2025 11:19:28 AM