Kerala High Court
Srinidhi Combines vs Federal Brands Limited on 17 January, 2022
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
Monday, the 17th day of January 2022 / 27th Pousha, 1943
WP(C) NO. 1321 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1. M/S. SRINIDHI COMBINES 39/582-B, "SUDHARMA", MONASTERY ROAD,
ERNAKULAM - 682011, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, D. ANAND
KUMAR PAI.
2. D. ANAND KUMAR PAI, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. SHRI M. DAMODARA PAI,
MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. SRINIDHI COMBINES, 39/582-B, "SUDHARMA",
MONASTERY ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682011.
3. UMESH PAI, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. SHRI S. SUNDARESH PAI, PARTNER, M/S.
SRINIDHI COMBINES, 39/582-B, "SUDHARMA", MONASTERY ROAD, ERNAKULAM -
682011.
RESPONDENTS:
1. M/S. FEDERAL BRANDS LIMITED 303-304, SHRI GURU GOBIND SINGH
INDUSTRIAL PREMISES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, WESTERN EXPRESS
HIGHWAY, GOREGAON (E), MUMBAI - 400063, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR MR. VINAY REDDY.
2. MANOJ B. DALVI, ADVOCATE, OFFICE NO.47, 3RD FLOOR, LAWYERS
CHAMBERS, R. S. SAPRE ROAD, (PICKET ROAD), NEAR SMALL CAUSE COURT,
DHOBI TALAO, MUMBAI - 400002.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P3 and P1,
pending disposal of the writ petition.
This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and
the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of
M/S. ANIL XAVIER, M.RISHIKESH SHENOY and SMITHA S., Advocates for the
petitioners, the court passed the following:
p.t.o
Exhibit P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.05.2021 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.05.2021 ISSUED BY THE
ADVOCATE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
N. NAGARESH, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.1321 of 2022
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of January, 2022
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an Arbitrator has been appointed by the respondents when there is no arbitration agreement at all. The Arbitrator has been appointed unilaterally. The petitioner has objected to the arbitration proceedings contending that there is no arbitration agreement between the petitioners and the 1 st respondent. The preliminary objection has not been taken into consideration by the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator is proceeding to pass an award. If the Arbitrator passes an award, in a matter where there is inherent lack of jurisdiction, the petitioners who are residents of Kerala will be dragged to Maharashtra for preferring an appeal.
2. Admit.
3. Issue urgent notice to respondents 1 and 2. W.P.(C) No.1321 of 2022 2
There will be an interim stay of further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P3, for a period of one month.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR 17-01-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar