CR/1709/2017 of M/S MADAN LAL WADHWA & CO Vs HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORP LTD on 31 December 2020

CR-1709 of 2017

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH

CR-1709 of 2017Date of decision:- 31.12.2020

M/s Madan Lal Wadhwa and Co.

Vs.

...Petitioner

Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:Mr. D.S. Gandhi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate

for the respondent.

***

Ritu Bahri, J.

The present civil revision petition under Article 227 of theConstitution of India is for setting aside of order dated 10.10.2011 (P-4)passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Amritsar whereby the matter insuit has been referred to Arbitrator on the application of the respondent.Further prayer is for setting aside of order dated 16.12.2016 (P-12) passedby learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Amritsar whereby the application of thepetitioner under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC for review oforder dated 10.10.2011, has been dismissed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

A bare perusal of order dated 10.10.2011 (P-4) shows that thetrial Court has referred to clause in the agreement between the partiesexecuted on 18.08.1986. In the agreement Annexure A-1 placed on recordvide C.M. No. 10313-CII-2020 in C.R. No. 1605-2017, it has been agreed CR-1709 of 2017

between the parties that in the case of the dispute, the matter will be referredto Arbitrator. The terms of the agreement are not in dispute between theparties and as per clause 29 of the above agreement, any dispute ordifference of any nature whatsoever or regarding any right, liability act,commission or account or any of the parties hereto arising out of or inrelation to this agreement shall be referred to the sole Arbitrator of theManaging Director of the Corporation or of some officer of the Corporation.

Since the terms of the agreement were not in dispute betweenthe parties, the impugned orders (P-4 and P-12) had rightly been passed andthe matter was referred to arbitrator. The review application has rightly beendismissed.

Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

31.12.2020G AroraWhether speaking/reasoned : Yes/NoWhether reportable: Yes/No (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE