M/S Maple Services And ANR v. The Managing Director And Ceo And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/332/2025 M/s Maple Services and another Vs.

The Managing Director and CEO and others Mr. Rakesh Kumar ... for the petitioners Mr. V.D.Sivabalan ... for the respondents October 27, 2025 [SR] Item No.10 The dispute arose between the parties with regard to the alleged non-payment of the bills by the respondents to the petitioners. A suggestion had been put by the Court to the parties, whether can it be mediated.

Mr. V.D.Sivabalan, learned advocate for the respondents seeks some time to file the affidavit-in-opposition. He submits that, there is no scope for mediation.

The petitioner no.1 is a proprietorship firm who is an enlisted Government Contractor dealing with Electronic Security Systems and IT Infra Structures. The petitioner no.2 is the proprietor of the petitioner no.1.

The respondents are officials of the Canara Bank. The writ petition has been filed with the allegation that despite having accepted the service of the petitioner no.1, as per the agreement, the bank and its officials have failed and neglected to pay the bills.

Mr. V.D.Sivabalan, learned advocate for the respondents submits that the claims are false. Inflated bills were raised. In my opinion, the writ court cannot go into such disputed questions. The disputes arose between the parties out of their contractual obligation under the agreement. A contract for supply, installation, testing, commissioning and AMC (Non-Comprehensive) of CCTV system, burglar alarm, fire alarm, stand alone fire cum burglar alarm, auto dialer system and fire extinguisher had been awarded to the petitioners. Accordingly, an agreement was also entered into sometime in May, 2012. The agreement contains an arbitration clause.

It provides that all disputes and differences of any kind whatever, arising out of or in connection with the agreement shall be referred to arbitration. The arbitrator may be appointed by both the parties and in case of disagreement, each party may appoint an arbitrator and the decision of the arbitrator/arbitrators shall be final.

Under such circumstances, in view of the agreement between the parties to refer the dispute to arbitration, the writ petition is not entered and disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to take steps for constitution of an arbitral tribunal, in accordance with law.

This Court has not gone into the merits of the issues involved. The appropriate forum shall decide all the issues that may be raised by either of the parties.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ( Shampa Sarkar, J. )