Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.33 seconds)
T. Rajaiah And Ors. vs Southern Roadways Ltd. (Represented By ... on 1 February, 1991 cites

The Premier Automobiles Limited vs Kamlakar Shantaram Wadke on 15 February, 1973

13. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that unless they succeed in getting the matter referred, it cannot be brought under the doctrine of election. Initiation of proceedings, according to him, under the Act will not be a step-in-aid. I do not agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners. If his contention is accepted, that only if he succeeds in getting the matter referred to the forum created by Act it can be construed as initiation of proceedings and in case if they fail in their attempt it will not be taken as a "proceeding." it will be opposed to reason. Any initiation to get redress under the provisions of the Act should be construed as a "proceeding" and having elected to initiate a proceeding, the petitioners cannot be permitted to say that the initiation made by them is not a "proceeding" since they failed in their attempt to get the matter referred to the forum created under the Act. I find even if the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is accepted, having elected to get redress under the provisions of the Act and having failed in their attempt, they have no right to invoke the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. Apart from this, I find the facts of the case will not fall under category (2) out of the four categories stated by the Supreme Court in Premier Automobile's case 1976 I LLN 1 : 1975-II Lab LJ 445 referred to above. The facts of the case squarely fall within; the facts of the case referred to in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in 1989 I L.L.N.676 and the ratio decidendi laid down by the Kerala High Court will apply to the facts of this case on all fours. As such I find the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suits.
Bombay High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 28 - Full Document
1