Challenge made in the present petition preferred under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is to the denial of ex parte interim injunction in exercise of powers under Order 39, Rule 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the learned Chamber Judge in the notice of motion taken out in Civil Suit No.350/2012 by the petitioner herein.
It is the case of the petitioner that there exists no contract between the petitioner and respondent and therefore Federation system of Arbitration, applicable to the disputes arising out of contract, will not be applicable to the sale contract No.S6v8560-B of the petitioner and in such circumstances initiation of Arbitration proceedings by FOSFA International and its unilateral appointment of Arbitrator is sought to be challenged.
On effective service of notice to the respondent-original defendants based at Singapore, learned senior counsel Mr. Saurabh Soparkar has appeared with learned advocate Mr.Manav Mehta. Learned counsel submitted that adjournment as sought for by the petitioner before FOSFA in Arbitration Proceedings is allowed and time is extended for filing the reply till 28th February, 2012. Further time of about 21 days for filing rejoinder shall also be available. In such circumstances, both the counsels agree that proceedings to restrain respondent from continuing in arbitration proceedings need to be adjudicated before the Trial Court.
Resultantly, parties are directed to proceed before the Trial Court for the hearing of injunction application in Regular Civil Suit No. 350/2012. Considering the challenges made in the present petition and also keeping in view the urgency made out in the matter, it is being directed while disposing of this petition, that the respondent herein shall file its reply to the injunction application by 24th February, 2012, and affidavit in rejoinder, if any to be filed, shall be submitted on or before 28th February, 2012 .
Hearing of notice of motion shall be completed with the pronouncement of the order within a fortnight thereafter. Considering the fact that the learned Chamber Judge since is having an urgent business to handle, it is left to the discretion of the learned Principal Judge of City Civil Court to decide as to whether the hearing of notice of motion shall be by the Chamber Court or the same requires to be assigned to any other learned Judge for the said purpose.
This petition stands disposed of in the above- mentioned terms. Needless to state that no opinion has been expressed by this Court in this petition on merits and Trial Court shall decide the matter independently on the basis of materials as may be made available as also based on the submissions of both the sides. No order as to cost.
(Ms.Sonia Gokani,J) bina Top