Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd vs Manju Khati on 26 August, 2014
Author: Sanjib Banerjee
Bench: Sanjib Banerjee
1 Serial No.27.
August 26, 2014.
SG CO No.2550 of 2014 Fullerton India Credit Co. Ltd.
-versus-
Manju Khati Mr Paritosh SInha Mr Amitava Mitra Ms Dolon Dasgupta ... for the petitioner.
The opposite party is not represented despite service.
The grievance of the petitioner is that an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been rejected on irrelevant considerations.
The order impugned dated June 10, 2014 is a cryptic one- paragraph order which bears reference to certain cases that were obviously not under the 1996 Act. Section 8 of the 1996 Act is clear and leaves the court with almost no latitude of discretion. Unless a statement on the subject matter of the disputes is filed, which would imply the filing of a written statement in a suit, an application for the reference to arbitration of the disputes covered by the arbitration agreement has to be allowed if the court finds the arbitration agreement to be in order and the subject matter of the suit to be covered thereby.
CO No.2550 of 2014 is allowed by setting aside the order impugned dated June 10, 2014 and by remanding the application 2 under Section 8 of the 1996 Act before the trial court for the trial court to consider the same in accordance with law and dispose it of within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
There will be no order as to costs.
Certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be urgently made available to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Sanjib Banerjee, J.)