Calcutta High Court
Mina Singh @ Meena Singh vs Sundaram Finance Limited on 3 September, 2018
Author: Ashis Kumar Chakraborty
Bench: Ashis Kumar Chakraborty
O-19
AP 549 OF 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
MINA SINGH @ MEENA SINGH
Versus
SUNDARAM FINANCE LIMITED
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY
Date : 3rd September, 2018.
For Petitioner :Mr. M.M. Verma, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajnish Kumar Kalwatia, Adv.
For Respondent : Mr. Arif Ali, Adv.
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Srivastava, Adv.
The Court : In this application under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by Act 3 of 2016 (in short, "the Act of 1996"), the petitioner has invoked the arbitration clause contained in Clause 22 of the agreement dated November 24, 2015 between the parties herein.
The arbitration clause contained in Clause 22 (b) of the said agreement dated November 24, 2015 contemplates that all disputes, differences and/or claims arising out of or touching the said agreement between the parties shall be adjudicated through arbitration by an Arbitrator to be nominated by the petitioner.
2
Clause 22 of the said agreement stipulates that venue of such arbitration proceeding shall be at Chennai and the language shall be in English.
When the venue of the arbitration proceeding between the parties has been fixed at Chennai, in view of the law laid by the Supreme Court in the case of Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd. -versus- Datawind Innovations Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2017) 7 SCC 678, this Court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain this application.
Accordingly, the application, AP No. 540 of 2018 stands rejected on the ground of jurisdiction.
The petitioner is, however, at liberty to approach the competent Court at Chennai to seek appropriate relief against the respondent under Section 9 of the Act of 1996.
(ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY, J.) S.De