Jitendra Singh v. The Bihar State Food And Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Through Its Managing Director And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Request Case No.290 of 2017 =========================================================== Jitendra Singh, Proprietor of M/S Maa Mundeshwari Nini Rice Mill, S/o Late Ramkeshwar Singh, Resident of Village-Kudra, P.S.-Kudra, District-Kaimur (Bhabhua).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Through Its Managing Director, Officer at Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Path, R-Block, Road No. 2, Patna-800001.
2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation, Limited, Officer at Khadya Bhawan, Daroga Prasad Rai Path, R-Block, Road No.2, Patna-800001
3. The District Manager, Bihar State Food & Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, District-Kaimur.
.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In identical proceedings i.e. in Request Case Nos.8 of 2016 and various other analogous cases, a detailed order has been passed by me on 19.4.2017 allowing an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and an Arbitral Tribunal has been constituted. In this application also, the
Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.290 of 2017 dt.19-01-2018 2/3 respondents herein had entered into an agreement with the applicants and the issues, identical in nature, have been referred for arbitration on 19.4.2017. As identical issues are involved in the matters which have already been considered on 19.4.2017 in Request Case No.8 of 2016 and other cases and as the same objections are raised herein, I see no reason to take a different view from the one already taken by me on 19.4.2017 when a series of cases detailed hereinabove were disposed of.
The objection of the respondents that the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in an S.L.P. cannot be a ground for postponing the matter as on several occasions adjournments are taken on this very ground. That apart, the contention that certain applicants have deposited the amount is not a ground for refusing arbitration, but a ground to be raised by the respondents before the Arbitrator and the consequential effect taken note of by the Arbitrator.
For the reasons and grounds indicated in the order dated 19.4.2017, these applications are allowed. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Samarendra Pratap Singh, a retired Judge of this Court is appointed as arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute. However, in these proceedings this Court has not gone into the merits of various objections raised with regard to maintainability
Patna High Court REQ. CASE No.290 of 2017 dt.19-01-2018 3/3 of the dispute. In view of the certificate proceedings held, the question of limitation and all other issues are left open to be canvassed by the parties before the arbitrator. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) N.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date23-01-2018 Transmission Date