Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.23 seconds)Section 8 in The Punjab Tenancy Rules [Entire Act]
M/S. Magma Leasing & Fin. Ltd. & Anr vs Potluri Madhavilata & Anr on 18 September, 2009
In Branch Manager, Magma Leasing & Finance Limited & Anr. v. Potluri
Madhavilata & Anr. (supra), Magma Leasing Limited Public United
Company (for short ’Magma’) and Smt. Potluri Madhavilata (for short
’hirer’) entered into an agreement of hire-purchase for the purchase
of a motor vehicle whereunder the hirer was required to pay hire-
purchase price in 46 instalments. When the instalments were not
paid, Magma seized the vehicle and sent a notice to the hirer saying
that the hire-purchase agreement has been terminated. The hirer then
filed a suit against Magma in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge for
recovery of possession of the vehicle and for restraining Magma from
transferring the vehicle. Magma filed a petition before the Civil
Judge under Section 8 of the 1996 Act praying that the dispute raised
in the suit be referred to an arbitrator in terms of Clause 22 of the
Hire-Purchase Agreement, which contained the arbitration agreement.
This Court reiterated that Section 8 is in the form of legislative
command to the court and once the prerequisite conditions are
satisfied, the Court must refer the parties to arbitration. In this
case again, there was no statutory bar to arbitration like Section 6
of the Tenancy Act providing that the dispute can only be decided by a
Civil Judge.
M/S. Agri Gold Exims Ltd vs M/S. Sri Lakshmi Knits & Wovens & Ors on 23 January, 2007
In Agri Gold Exims Ltd. v. Sri Lakshmi Knits & Wovens & Ors. (supra),
the parties had entered into a memorandum of understanding in relation
to the business of export and the memorandum of understanding
contained an arbitration clause that in case of any dispute between
the two parties, the same shall be referred to arbitration, by two
arbitrators, nominated by each of the parties and the award of the
arbitrators shall be binding on both the parties. Agri Gold Exims
Ltd. filed a suit in the District Court at Vijayawada for recovery of
an amount of Rs.36,14,887/- and for future interest on a sum of
Rs.53,79,149/-. Sri Lakshmi Knits & Wovens filed an application under
Section 8 of the 1996 Act for referring the dispute to the arbitral
tribunal in terms of the arbitration agreement contained in the
memorandum of understanding. This application, however, was dismissed
by the District Court, but on revision the High Court reversed the
order of the District Court and referred the parties to arbitration.
Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd vs M/S. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums on 23 July, 2003
Agri Gold Exims Ltd. carried an appeal to this Court and this Court
reiterated that Section 8 of the 1996 Act is peremptory in nature and
in a case where there exists an arbitration agreement, the Court is
under obligation to refer the parties to arbitration in terms of the
arbitration agreement, relying on Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
(supra). In this case again, there was no statutory bar to
arbitration like the one in Section 6 of the Tenancy Act providing
that the dispute can only be decided by the Civil Judge in a suit.
Section 8 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Natraj Studios (P) Ltd vs Navrang Studios & Anr on 7 January, 1981
This decision in Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. v.
Navrang Studios & Anr. (supra) supports our conclusion that the
arbitration agreement between the landlord and tenant has to give way
to Section 6 of the Tenancy Act which confers exclusive jurisdiction
on the Civil Judge, to decide a dispute between the landlord and the
tenant with regard to recovery of possession of the tenanted premises
in a suit filed by the landlord.