Q. What are the equivalent citations for Sameer Barar & Others vs Ratan Bhushan Jain & Others ?

The equivalence citation are2006 (1) RAJ 116 ; (2006) 1 SCC 419 ; 2006 (1) ARBLR 214 ; LQ/SC/2005/999 ;

Sameer Barar & Others Vs. Ratan Bhushan Jain & Others On 03 October, 2005

Q: Q. What was the bench assigned for the case Sameer Barar & Others vs Ratan Bhushan Jain & Others?

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. VARIAVA, HONBLE MR. JUSTICE TARUN CHATTERJEE

Open iDraf

Sameer Barar & Others v. Ratan Bhushan Jain & Others

Sameer Barar & Others
v.
Ratan Bhushan Jain & Others

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No. 6154 Of 2005 | 03-10-2005

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard parties.

3. Even if the Civil Court felt that, because of the arbitration clause the suit was not maintainable, it could have treated the application to be one under Section 9. We are told that Arbitration Application No. 384 of 2005 has already been filed before the Chief Justice for appointment of an Arbitrator by the respondents. We, therefore, direct that pending the appointment of an Arbitrator and for three weeks thereafter, the appellants will not be dispossessed from the premises in their possession. The appellants to then apply to the Arbitrator for interim orders.

4. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

5. No order as to costs.

Advocates List

For the Appellants ------ For the Respondents -------

Bench List

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. VARIAVA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TARUN CHATTERJEE

Eq Citation

2006 (1) RAJ 116

(2006) 1 SCC 419

2006 (1) ARBLR 214

LQ/SC/2005/999

HeadNote

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 8 — Suit under arbitration clause — Maintainability — Stay of proceedings — Arbitration Application No. 384 of 2005 already filed before Chief Justice for appointment of an Arbitrator — Pending appointment of Arbitrator and for three weeks thereafter, appellants directed not to be dispossessed from premises in their possession — Appellants to then apply to Arbitrator for interim orders — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, S. 9