w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Alstom T&D India Ltd., Formerly known as Areva T&D India Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Rep. by its authorized signatory, Padappai v/s M/s. Texcel International Pvt., Ltd., Represented by Mukunthan C.O.O, Chengalpattu


Company & Directors' Information:- K N INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201UP2002PLC026841

Company & Directors' Information:- D B H INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1950PTC057209

Company & Directors' Information:- V AND S INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1992PTC049964

Company & Directors' Information:- S S A INTERNATIONAL LTD [Active] CIN = U15122DL1995PLC068186

Company & Directors' Information:- A T N INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = L65993WB1983PLC080793

Company & Directors' Information:- TEXCEL INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28999TN2001PTC048200

Company & Directors' Information:- D D INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909PB1995PTC016929

Company & Directors' Information:- T K INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U55101OR1982PLC001092

Company & Directors' Information:- N R INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = L74999WB1991PLC051738

Company & Directors' Information:- K J INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = L15142PB1993PLC011274

Company & Directors' Information:- A K S INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1996PLC076327

Company & Directors' Information:- S P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100WB1994PTC063228

Company & Directors' Information:- B. K. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999DL2006PTC157013

Company & Directors' Information:- R S C INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = L17124RJ1993PLC007136

Company & Directors' Information:- J C INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51109WB1999PLC089037

Company & Directors' Information:- M T L INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U24219UP2001PTC025965

Company & Directors' Information:- T C N S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U51311DL1996PTC080096

Company & Directors' Information:- K V S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL2003PTC120770

Company & Directors' Information:- G N INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2001PTC110766

Company & Directors' Information:- S H A M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH1994PTC079867

Company & Directors' Information:- M K INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL1996PLC083430

Company & Directors' Information:- V. G. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101DL2007PTC162540

Company & Directors' Information:- D R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24132DL1996PTC079867

Company & Directors' Information:- R H INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL2007PLC159452

Company & Directors' Information:- G & G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17120DL2012PTC234047

Company & Directors' Information:- A & D INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36109RJ2007PTC024176

Company & Directors' Information:- AREVA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Liquidation] CIN = U17291MH2008PTC206194

Company & Directors' Information:- K A I INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U13100OR2007PTC009647

Company & Directors' Information:- C G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1996PTC097577

Company & Directors' Information:- K C INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1994PLC060402

Company & Directors' Information:- M P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29130MH1997PTC107943

Company & Directors' Information:- A S INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1993PLC056158

Company & Directors' Information:- H C S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15312PB2012PTC036219

Company & Directors' Information:- L N G INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL1993PLC053438

Company & Directors' Information:- S. D. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900UP2008PTC036047

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND I INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL1995PTC072210

Company & Directors' Information:- L T INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1999PLC097892

Company & Directors' Information:- A. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51102GJ2008PTC053840

Company & Directors' Information:- S J M INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52110DL1987PLC028571

Company & Directors' Information:- S B S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101DL1997PTC085878

Company & Directors' Information:- R. A. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51225DL2008PTC177405

Company & Directors' Information:- B G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U50300PB2014PTC038889

Company & Directors' Information:- S F INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999PB2000PTC023654

Company & Directors' Information:- R T S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63022DL1997PTC089328

Company & Directors' Information:- I K INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC066267

Company & Directors' Information:- C K INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1991PTC045625

Company & Directors' Information:- L A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909PB2010PTC033683

Company & Directors' Information:- H R V INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U74899UP1993PTC057665

Company & Directors' Information:- K P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U24110GJ2007PTC050026

Company & Directors' Information:- V S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U85100MH1997PTC109647

Company & Directors' Information:- N N INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01111DL1999PTC099094

Company & Directors' Information:- S R V INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2012PTC243060

Company & Directors' Information:- V. S. Y. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999UP2008PTC035521

Company & Directors' Information:- U M I INTERNATIONAL LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1990PLC049671

Company & Directors' Information:- A. R. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900MH2010PTC228539

Company & Directors' Information:- B R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1993PTC055562

Company & Directors' Information:- M J INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U74899DL1982PTC013231

Company & Directors' Information:- D N INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36911TN1996PLC034205

Company & Directors' Information:- M. H. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102DL2007PTC164267

Company & Directors' Information:- H AND Z INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U10102AS1995PLC004509

Company & Directors' Information:- M G M INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1982PTC013580

Company & Directors' Information:- J J INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51109DL1992PTC047657

Company & Directors' Information:- H D INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1994PLC060720

Company & Directors' Information:- K. A. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101UP2012PTC049338

Company & Directors' Information:- J & G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18109DL2012PTC238392

Company & Directors' Information:- K R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17291DL2008PTC172188

Company & Directors' Information:- D. J. INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U65910MH1999PLC119298

Company & Directors' Information:- S P INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999UP1965PTC003091

Company & Directors' Information:- J M INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U45201WB1991PTC050829

Company & Directors' Information:- D P C INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210WB1984PTC037378

Company & Directors' Information:- B M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1992PTC048736

Company & Directors' Information:- S G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51109WB1998PTC086547

Company & Directors' Information:- B N INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15412WB1999PTC089316

Company & Directors' Information:- V A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01111DL2000PTC104712

Company & Directors' Information:- S. J. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27310DL2007PTC169438

Company & Directors' Information:- N H B INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U67190MH1997PTC107387

Company & Directors' Information:- P D K INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74140WB1992PTC056468

Company & Directors' Information:- G. S. C. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29120MH1994PTC080380

Company & Directors' Information:- A J INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC060818

Company & Directors' Information:- J S M INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U85110KA1996PLC020046

Company & Directors' Information:- M K N INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2002PTC117207

Company & Directors' Information:- N M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74120MH2012PTC234492

Company & Directors' Information:- S S M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL1997PTC089876

Company & Directors' Information:- A P J INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909HR2010PTC040304

Company & Directors' Information:- T. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900DL1997PTC091049

Company & Directors' Information:- V R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101UP2011PTC043952

Company & Directors' Information:- A & F INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00265KA1995PTC018998

Company & Directors' Information:- M E C INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U33111GJ1963PTC082423

Company & Directors' Information:- J K INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U01100MH2004PTC144492

Company & Directors' Information:- D. S. R. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999UP2010PTC039954

Company & Directors' Information:- B L S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900UR2010PTC033210

Company & Directors' Information:- R B INTERNATIONAL LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101WB1993PLC059515

Company & Directors' Information:- P Y INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U51102RJ1995PTC010133

Company & Directors' Information:- R C INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909TG1991PLC012477

Company & Directors' Information:- N J INDIA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70101UP2004PLC028722

Company & Directors' Information:- I AND A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72200TG1995PTC019936

Company & Directors' Information:- P V INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1998PTC094598

Company & Directors' Information:- I B INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U72200DL2000PTC105735

Company & Directors' Information:- A M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC066228

Company & Directors' Information:- K K M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17110MH1995PTC089836

Company & Directors' Information:- Z. H. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U21098MH2010PTC210735

Company & Directors' Information:- J R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909TN2002PTC048744

Company & Directors' Information:- H P AND B G INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U50500DL1999PTC100851

Company & Directors' Information:- L S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2009PTC193390

Company & Directors' Information:- M B INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U52190DL2001PTC110572

Company & Directors' Information:- O K R INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900DL1996PTC077152

Company & Directors' Information:- B B C INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U25209WB1984PTC037383

Company & Directors' Information:- K S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909MH2001PTC134345

Company & Directors' Information:- A TO Z INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51101TN1992PTC022507

Company & Directors' Information:- C & A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51900MH1982PTC026718

Company & Directors' Information:- J S INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51900MH1982PTC027604

Company & Directors' Information:- A C INDIA INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1989PTC034784

Company & Directors' Information:- S. S. N. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29306DL1981PTC012616

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA INTERNATIONAL COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51228MH1955PTC009483

Company & Directors' Information:- R K INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U63040PB1982PTC004926

Company & Directors' Information:- L & P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52100DL2016PTC292025

Company & Directors' Information:- J D K INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1982PTC014087

Company & Directors' Information:- R B N INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52300DL2012PTC243998

Company & Directors' Information:- P AND P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED. [Strike Off] CIN = U24100OR1993PTC003244

Company & Directors' Information:- B P INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U31909HP1984PTC005785

Company & Directors' Information:- E C INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1982PTC013146

Company & Directors' Information:- R A R E INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31900DL2005PTC134395

Company & Directors' Information:- D I D INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U28112MH2014PTC258750

Company & Directors' Information:- S R A INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1980PTC010389

Company & Directors' Information:- R Z INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900KA2012PTC064445

Company & Directors' Information:- M M INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Converted to LLP] CIN = U51312DL1977PTC008583

Company & Directors' Information:- A K INDIA INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45201DL1981PTC012389

Company & Directors' Information:- O P INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U55101PB2013PTC037499

Company & Directors' Information:- J & A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51900PB2013PTC037302

Company & Directors' Information:- A P M INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900TN2014PTC095953

Company & Directors' Information:- Y. A. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900RJ2012PTC040431

Company & Directors' Information:- D & A INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2015PTC262713

Company & Directors' Information:- R L INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18204UP2016PTC076344

Company & Directors' Information:- V P S INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93030UP2014PTC066242

Company & Directors' Information:- J V INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51102DL2012PTC240197

Company & Directors' Information:- R I K INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U52590DL2015PTC283801

Company & Directors' Information:- Y & H INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63000DL2014PTC266649

Company & Directors' Information:- S R L INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U20296AP2013PTC085533

Company & Directors' Information:- M D INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140MH1981PTC025007

Company & Directors' Information:- INTERNATIONAL CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51109UR1935PTC000663

Company & Directors' Information:- A B C INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1990PTC041062

Company & Directors' Information:- D C M INTERNATIONAL LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL2000PTC004208

Company & Directors' Information:- B C I INTERNATIONAL LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900DL1977PLC008468

    C.M.A. No. 3683 of 2019 & C.M.P. No. 21091 of 2019

    Decided On, 31 January 2020

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

    For the Appellant: Krishna Srinivasan for M/s S. Ramasubramaniam & Associates, Advocates. For the Respondent: S. Dhassaiya, Advocate.



Judgment Text


(Prayer: The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside the order dated 16.07.2019 in I.A.No.579 of 2015 in O.S.No.182 of 2015 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge at Chengalpet and dismiss the suit in O.S.No.182 of 2015 and refer the parties to Arbitration.)

1. The present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as against the order passed in I.A.No.579 of 2015 in O.S.No.182 of 2015 by the learned Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu, which was dismissed by order dated 16.07.2019.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal is that the respondent/plaintiff filed O.S.No.182 of 2015 seeking a Judgment and Decree holding the appellant herein, as liable for the suit claim and directing the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs.44,22,032/- to the respondent / plaintiff together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of each and every invoices becoming payable in accordance with the appellant / defendant's purchase order till the date of payment as stated in the plaint filed by the respondent. The appellant is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in the suit, hence they are described as such herein.

3. The respondent / plaintiff's company is involved in engineering and fabrication works fabricating steel parts, structures and its various components, which is being supplied to its customers and one such customer is the defendant / appellant herein, who used to place purchase orders on the respondent / plaintiff for different components at different rates on different dates. Based on the purchase order, considering the general terms and conditions stipulated in the purchase order, the respondent / plaintiff supplied the products to the appellant / defendant on credit basis and the respondent / plaintiff maintained a running account with the appellant / defendant for their business transaction. One of the condition when supply is made by the respondent / plaintiff is that the appellant / defendant has a right to reject the parts within 60 days after delivery. If any parts are discovered to be defective, the appellant / defendant can only request the respondent / plaintiff to repair the parts, as per the terms of the purchase order issued by the appellant / defendant.

4. The business transaction between the appellant and the respondent was going smoothly misunderstanding and differences of opinion arose between them when the appellant / defendant had withheld the payment to the tune of Rs.44,22,032/- that was payable to the respondent / plaintiff herein, which payment arose on account of various products and components supplied to the appellant / defendant by the respondent / plaintiff.

5. Despite several reminders and demand, the appellant / defendant did not make payment to the respondent / plaintiff which made the respondent / plaintiff to file O.S.No.182 of 2015 before the learned Additional District Judge, Kancheepuram District. Along with the suit, I.A.No.356 of 2015 was filed by the respondent / plaintiff under Order 38 Rule 5 of the CPC, but sought for an order of attachment before Judgment of certain plant and machinery of the appellant / defendant. The appellant / defendant had filed detailed counter for such interim application seeking for attachment before judgment by the respondent / plaintiff refuting the claim made by the respondent / plaintiff.

6. Pending the said application filed by the respondent / plaintiff, the appellant herein had filed I.A.No.579 of 2015 under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC, seeking a prayer to dismiss O.S.No.182 of 2015 and to refer the matter to arbitration on the ground that the suit is not maintainable by the general terms and conditions for all purchase orders placed by the appellant herein contained the arbitration clause. This application filed by the appellant was refuted by the respondent herein on the ground that the purchase orders that were involved in the suit or subject matter of the suit were totally different and those purchase orders did not contain any general terms and conditions that has the 'Dispute Resolution Clause' prayed that the application filed for dismissal of the suit to be dismissed and to allow his application filed under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC seeking attachment before Judgment.

7. The application filed by the appellant herein under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC was heard finally and decided by the learned Additional District Judge, Kancheepuram District and gave his findings by dismissing the application by an order dated 16.07.2019 on the ground that there was no written agreement between the parties and the alleged dispute resolution clause is not found in all purchase orders, especially those purchase order which was subject purchase order of the suit and dismissed the application filed by the appellant. As against the said order, the present appeal is filed by the appellant.

8. Mr.Krishna Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant , who had canvassed in favour of the arbitration proceedings, submitted that the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kancheepuram is perse illegal, as the suit ought to have been dismissed and the matter should have been referred to Arbitration for the reason, that there is a dispute resolution clause under General terms and conditions and when there is an dispute resolution alternative method is available, the suit filed by the respondent is barred and the court has no jurisdiction to entertain such suit. He further argued that the findings of the learned judge on the ground that the original arbitration agreement or the certified copy was not produced and the documents produced by the appellant were illegible, cannot be a ground for dismissal of the application filed by the appellant. Also, the learned counsel vehemently argued that when it is a running account merely because certain purchase order did not contain the general terms and conditions does not entitle the respondent / plaintiff to invoke civil jurisdiction.

9. Mr.S.Krishna Srinivas, learned counsel for the appellant further vehemently contented that the impugned order suffers the legal scrutiny of this Court where the learned Judge's observation that the appellant failed to raise the lack of jurisdiction of the civil court under Section 8 of arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 at the first instance, not later that the date of submitting of the first statement on the substance of dispute. The learned counsel also relied upon the following judgments:

(i) Manu/SCT/0533/2011 [Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc. V. SBI Home Finance Ltd., and Ors.].

(ii) MANU/SC/0177/2015 [Sundaram Finance Limited and Ors. V. T.Thankam]

(iii) MANU/SC/1672/2009 [The Branch Manager, Magma Leasing and Finance Limited and Anr. V. Potluri Madhavilata and Anr.]

and prayed to allow the appeal thereby setting aside the orders passed by the Additional District Judge and refer the matter for arbitration in accordance with Dispute resolution clause, which is found in the General Conditions of purchase agreement.

10. Mr.Dhassiya, learned counsel for the respondent had raised a preliminary objection, as to the maintainability of the present appeal under 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, as the order passed by the lower court would not come under provisions of Section 37(1) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act and is liable to be dismissed. He further contended that the order passed by the lower court is not appellable and the appellant should approach the revisional jurisdiction and not the appellate jurisdiction. That apart, the learned counsel also submitted that none of the purchase order, which were the subject matter of the suit neither contain the general conditions of the purchase nor contain the Arbitration clause for the matter to be referred to arbitration and only civil jurisdiction is the appropriate jurisdiction that can be invoked and rightly had been invoked by the respondent.

11. Mr.Dhassiya, learned counsel for the respondent also placed reliance on Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, especially Section 8 (2), which reads thus:

'8(2) The application referred to in sub-section (1) shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied by the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof'.

which contains the filing of original Arbitration Agreement or certified copy of the arbitration agreement before the court for it to be referred to the arbitration processes. When the appellant failed to produce either the original arbitration agreement, or the certified copy of the agreement, the lower court is correct in rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC. On the fact also, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the suit filed for recovery of Rs.44,22,032/-, in which the respondent has taken out the application for attachment before Judgment, as such, the appellant failed to adhere the provision of Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, wherein it specifies that any plea requesting for reference to the arbitration shall be made not later than the date of submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute. As such, the learned counsel for the respondent placed reliance on the various dates, when the proceedings were initiated, especially when the appellant has filed counter to the petition filed order 38 Rule 5 seeking attachment before judgment and when the particular application was pending, the appellant at the later point of time, took out an application in I.A.No.579 of 2015 under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC.

12. As the petition filed by the appellant is in consonance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the dismissal of the petition filed by the appellant is justified. In Civil Appeal Nos. 3164 and 3165 of 2017 [Kerala State Electricity Board and Another V. Kurien E Kalathil and Another and the Judgment reported in O.P.No.186 of 2017 Gobins India Engineering Pvt., Ltd., rep by its Managing Director Binu S.Gopoinath V. SBQ steels Private Ltd.,

13. Heard both the leaned counsels and perused the materials available on record.

14. The preliminary objection raised by the respondent / plaintiff with regard to the maintainability of the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 37(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is to be taken up. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the present Appeal under Section 37(1) of arbitration and conciliation Act is maintainable, as the appeal is arising from the order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge passed under Section 8 of Arbitration and conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC. As there is no specific bar of filing appeal under Section 37(1) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act as against the order passed under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the appeal is maintainable. To deny the same, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that since there is no specific mention about an appeal being filed against the order passed under an application filed under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the present appeal cannot be entertained and hence to be dismissed for want of falling under the purview of Section 37. On perusal of Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, as amended by Act 3 of 2016 with effect from 28.05.2015. For useful reference Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act is reproduced as under:

37. Appealable orders.- (1) An appeal shall lie from the following orders (and from no others) to the Court authorised by law to hear appeals from original decrees of the Court passing the order, namely:

(a) granting or refusing to grant any measure under section 9:

(b) setting aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under section 34.

(2) Appeal shall also lie to a court from an order of the arbitral tribunal,

(a) accepting the plea referred to in sub-section (2) or subsection(3) of section 16; or

(b) granting or refusing to grant an interim measure under section 17.

3) No second appeal shall lie from an order passed in appeal under this section, but nothing in this section shall affect or taken away any right to appeal to the Supreme Court.

15. The appeal provision under Chapter 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 permits an appeal being filed as against original decrees of the court and the appeal provisions restricts to original decrees including refusing the parties to refer to Arbitration and Conciliation under Section 8. However, the learned counsel relying on the pre-amended provision of the Section 37 which did not include original decrees passed under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act refusing to refer the parties to arbitration. As such, it is seen from the statute that the appeals from the orders refusing to refer the parties under Section 8 was included by way of amendment with effect from 23.10.2015 by amended Act 2015 (3 of 2016)

16. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent / plaintiff was relying on the pre-amended appeal provision, which does not permit appeals being filed as against decree refusing to refer parties to Arbitration under Section 8. It is seen from the record that I.A. No.579 of 2015 seeking dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.182 of 2015 and refer the parties to arbitration was filed on 14.08.2015 and later the order dismissing such application came to be passed by the learned Additional District Judge on 16.10.2019.

17. From the careful perusal of the amended provisions and dates, this Court is of the view that the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is maintainable for the reason that when the order is passed on 16.10.2019, the amendment to Section 37 was very much available to include appeals arising out of the original decrees refusing to refer the parties to arbitration under Section 8. Hence this Court is not inclined to agree with the arguments put forth by the counsel for the respondent with regard to the maintainability of the present appeal.

18. As seen from the records, the application in I.A.No. 579 of 2015 in O.S.No.182 of 2015 has been filed by the appellant under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Section 9 of CPC seeking a prayer for dismissing the suit and to refer the parties to Arbitration, as per the case of appellant, there were several purchase orders, faced by the appellant to the respondent for supply of certain materials. Most of the purchase orders contains the general terms and conditions, which binds both the parties. As per clause 25, as referred by the learned counsel for the appellant, which relates to dispute resolution's that ''All of any of the disputes / differences arising between the parties with respect to the contract shall be referred to arbitration by a sole arbitrator, mutually agreed by the parties. The arbitration shall be conducted as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as may be amended from time to time. The venue of arbitration shall be at Delhi and the courts shall have the exclusive jurisdiction."

19. In such event, any dispute that arises between the parties should only be resolved through arbitration and no civil court should have jurisdiction in the matter. It is seen from the records that Application No.579 of 2015 in O.S.No.182 of 2015 is filed under Section 8 of arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 CPC. Hence it is necessary to extract Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

'8. Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement.- (1) A judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall, if a party so applies not later than when submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute, refer the parties to arbitration.

(2) The application referred to in sub-section (1) shall not be entertained unless it is accompanied by the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof.

(3) Notwithstanding that an application has been made under sub-section (1) and that the issue is pending before the judicial authority, an arbitration may be commenced or continued and an arbitral award made.

20. On careful reading of the above provision, which makes it clear that no court will have jurisdiction if it is expressly or impliedly barred by any law. However, so far as the express bar is specified in the above provision is with regard to the existence of the arbitration agreement. On a careful perusal of the pleadings before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, it is categorically clear that the suit was filed as on 20.03.2015 and I.A.No.356 of 2015 was filed under Order 30 Rule 5 of CPC in March, 2015, to which a counter was filed by the appellant on 23.07.2015, thereafter, from the records it could be seen that I.A.No.579 of 2015 in O.S.No.182 of 2015 was filed on 14.08.2015, seeking dismissal of the suit and further, to refer to arbitration proceedings, which is later to the filing of the counter in I.A.No. 356 of 2015 by the appellant.

21. Section 8 clearly stipulates that whenever a suit is filed in a civil court the cause of the action of the said suit emanates from a contract in which parties have voluntarily and willingly agreed to settle the dispute by arbitration. If such conditions are met, then it is bounden duty of the court to refer the parties to arbitration. It is mandatory that the essentials of Section 8 of Arbitration and conciliation Act are fulfilled the procedure contemplates therein has to be as followed as such.

22. On the careful perusal of the said affidavit in I.A.No.579 of 2015, there is a reference to the Clause 25 of the General Terms and Conditions of purchases, however, it is seen from the record that neither the original of the agreement nor the certified copy of the agreement containing the dispute resolution clause were filed before the lower court. Section 8(1) mandates that the applicant, who seeks reference to the suit to arbitral proceeding shall file the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof. It is a categorical finding of the learned Additional District Judge that the appellant has filed Exs.P.1 to P.3, the purchase orders in support of his claim and it is an admitted fact that the appellant has not filed the original arbitration agreement or a certified copy, as contemplated under Section 8(2) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by Act 3 of 2015.

23. The above facts necessitated this Court to refer the Judgment reported in 2010 (1) SCC 72 in Radha Krishnan V. Maestro Engineers and Others at Paragraph No. 14 ''... that arguments were favoured by either parties relating to the ambit of Section 8(2) of Act wherein scope mandatory requirement to file the original copy of partnership deed dated 07.04.2003 was elaborately discussed. It is to be noted that since we have already decided there is no requirement to appoint an arbitrator, in view of the matter that the issues involved in the case involved for detailed investigations into the same and production of elaborate evidence to prove the allegations or refute the same. There is no need to delve into the matter. Even assuming that a dispute subsists and an arbitrator is appointed, still the appellant cannot absolve himself from the mandatory requirement of filing the original copy of the deed."

24. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred case has categorically held that it is mandatory requirement under Section 8(2) of the Act to file the original copy of the contractual agreement. Nothing prevented the appellant herein to produce such purchase order in original containing general conditions of purchase, failure to follow the mandatory provisions of Section 8(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is decisive and the findings of the learned Additional District Judge, who had dismissed the petition filed under Section 8(2) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC, by the appellant has to be sustained.

25. When failure to follow the mandates under Sections of Arbitration and Conciliation act is decisive, seeking a suit to be dismissed and disputes to be referred to arbitration proceedings was relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant in Manu/SC/2/0482/2003 [Hindustan Petroleum Corpn.Ltd.,V.Pinkcity Midway Petroleums] in Paragraph No.16:

The question then would arise: what would be the role of the Civil Court when an argument is raised that such an arbitration clause does not apply to the facts of the case in hand? Learned counsel for the appellant contends that it is a matter which should be raised before the arbitrator who is competent to adjudicate upon the same and the Civil Court should not embark upon an inquiry in regard to the applicability of the arbitration clause to the facts of the case. While learned counsel appearing for the respondent contends that since the applicability of the arbitration clause to the facts of the case goes to the very root of the jurisdiction of the reference to arbitration, this question will have to be decided by the Civil Court before referring the matter to arbitration even in cases where there is admittedly an arbitration clause. The answer to this argument, in our opinion, is found in Section 16 of the Act itself. It has empowered the Arbitral Tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction including rule on any objection with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. That apart, a Constitution Bench of this Court in Konkan Railway (supra) with reference Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd vs M/S. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums on 23 July, 2003 Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1087099/ 5 to the power of the arbitrator under Section 16 has laid down thus :

"It might also be that in a given case the Chief Justice or his designate may have nominated an arbitrator although the period of thirty days had not expired. If so, the Arbitral Tribunal would have been improperly constituted and be without jurisdiction. It would then be open to the aggrieved party to require the Arbitral Tribunal to rule on its jurisdiction. Section 16 provides for this. It states that the Arbitral Tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction. That the Arbitral Tribunal may rule "on any objections with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement" shows that the Arbitral Tribunal's authority under Section 16 is not confined to the width of its jurisdiction, as was submitted by learned counsel for the appellants, but goes to the very root of its jurisdiction. There would, therefore, be no impediment in contending before the Arbitral Tribunal that it had been wrongly constituted by reason of the fact that the Chief Justice or his designate had nominated an arbitrator although the period of thirty days had not expired and that, therefore, it had no jurisdiction."

and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that 'the language of Section 8 of Arbitration and conciliation Act is peremptory in nature, therefore, in cases where there is an arbitrary clause in the agreement, it is obligatory for the court to refer the parties to arbitration in terms of their arbitration agreement. However, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court will not apply to the case on hand, as the appellant, who invokes Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act has not fulfilled the conditions, laid down in Section 8 of Arbitration Act.

26. In Manu/SC/0177/2015, [Sundaram Finance Limited and Ors. V. T.Thankam] this also goes against the appellant as the Hon'ble Supreme Court categorically held that only when an application is duly filed in terms of Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the civil court jurisdiction will be ousted to continue the suit.

27. In the Judgment in Manu/SC/1672 of 2009 [The Branch Manager, Magma Leasing and Finance Limited and Anr. V. Potluri Madhavilata and Anr.] , the case referred by the appellant goes contrary to his interest. As the Hon'ble Supreme Court at Paragraph No.22 had categorically held that 'An analysis of Section 8 would show that for its applicability, the following conditions must be satisfied: (a) that there exists an arbitration agreement; (b) that action has been brought to the court by one party to the arbitration agreement against the other party; (c) that the subject matter of the suit is same as the subject matter of the arbitration agreement; (d) that the other party before he submits his first statement of the substance of the dispute, moves the court for referring the parties to arbitration; and (e) that along with the application the other party tenders the original arbitration agreement or duly certified copy thereof.'

28. As far as applying the above citations referred by the appellant and on perusal of the material, it is categorically clear that nothing is on record to show that the appellant has fulfilled the pre-requisite conditions of Section 8. It goes without saying that applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred case, the appellant failed to fulfill the basic conditions of Section 8.

29. In Manu/SC/0533/2011 [Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc., V. SBI Home Finance Ltd., and Ors], the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paragraph Nos.17 and 18 had held that filing of reply to an application for temporary injunction attachment before judgment, appointment of receiver cannot be construed as statement of disputes as it is done to avoid an interim order made against him. In fact, in the late

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

r paragraph, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that filing an detailed objection to an interim application for internal relief cannot be concerned to be a statement on the substance of dispute resulting in submitting to oneself to jurisdiction of the Court. As such, the above case law referred by the appellant squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the case. Though the appellant has filed an application under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Section 9 of CPC for dismissing the suit and referring the dispute to the Arbitration, later had filed the counter to the I.A. under Order 38 seeking attachment before Judgment. The appellant had not followed the other mandatory provisions of Section 8. There is no piece of materials in the records to show that the appellant has complied with the conditions laid down the conditions under Section 8(2). 30. The learned counsel for the respondent relied on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A.Nos.3164 and 3165 of 2019 [Kerala State Electricity Board and Anr. V. Kurien E.Kalathil and Anr.] in Paragraph No.39 of the Judgment wherein it is held that 'Referring the parties to Arbitration a serious civil consequences. Once the parties are referred to arbitration, the proceedings will be in accordance with provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the matter will go outside the stream of the civil court. Under Section 19 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the arbitral tribunal shall not be bound by the Code of Civil Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act. Once the award is passed, the award shall be set aside only under the limited grounds. Hence referring the parties to arbitration, a serious civil consequences procedurally and substantively....' 31. This Court is guided by the above referred Judgments made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, when a party approaches the Civil Court for redressal of disputes and the different who alleges that there is an arbitral clause for the resolution of disputes arising between them should be prudent enough to follow the conditions enumerated under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. As Section 8 is the only provision in the act, which entitles a party seeking a referral to arbitration, in a pending suit. Even if there is arbitration agreement between the parties, the onus is on the party claim to have approached the Court under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the view that the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Chengalpet has to be sustained and this Court do not find any infirmities in the findings of the learned Additional District Judge, Chengalpet. Hence, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed by the appellant fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
O R