ANIL S/O JAGANNATH RANA AND OTHERS versus RAJENDRA S/O RADHAKISHAN RANA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2014] 12 S.C.R. 553 · Decided: 18-12-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ANIL R. DAVE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 12 S.C.R. 553 
ANIL SIO JAGANNATH RANA AND OTHERS 
v. 
RAJENDRA SIO RADHAKISHAN RANA AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 11604 of 2014) 
DECEMBER 18, 2014 
[ANIL R. DAVE AND KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: s.11(6)- Once the 
judicial authority takes a decision not to refer the parties to 
arbitration, and the said decision becomes final, thereafter C 
s. 11 (6) route before the Chief Justice is not available to either 
party - Res judicata. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. In the instant case, the order passed by the 
D 
civil court that it was well within its jurisdiction to try the 
suit, despite the objection regarding the existence of a 
clause for arbitration, became final. Thereafter, Section 
11 (6) jurisdiction of the Chief Justice cannot be invoked 
. by either party. The principle of res judicata will also be 
E 
attracted in such a case. [Para 14] [561-E] 
Satyadhyan .Ghosal and Ors. v. Deorajin Debi (Smt.) and 
Anr. AIR 1960 SC 941: 1960 SCR 590; Hope Plantations 
Ltd. v. Talu~ Land Board, Peermade and Anr. (1999) 5 SCC 
F 
590: 1998 (2) Suppl. SCR 514; Dr. Subramanian Swamy 
v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors (2014) 5 SCC 75: 2014 
(1) SCR 308; Surjit Singh and Ors. v. Gurwant Kaur and Ors. 
2014 (9) SCALE 768 - relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
1960 SCR 590 
relied on 
1998 (2) Suppl. SCR 514 
relied on 
553 
Para 15 
Para 16 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
554 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 12 S.C.R. 
2014 (1) SCR 308 
2014 (9) SCALE 768 
relied on 
relied on 
Para 17 
Para 17 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
11604 of 2014. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 28.03.2014 of the High 
Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in 
Arbitration Application No. 12 of 2013. 
Vivek C. Solshe, C.G. Scilshe for the Appellants. 
Amol B. Karande for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KURIAN, J.: 1. Leave granted. 
2. Once a judicial authority takes a decision under Section 
8(1) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter 
referred to as "the Act") declining to refer the dispute pending 
before it to arbitration and the said decision having become 
E final, whether either party to the proceedings can thereafter 
invoke. the jurisdiction of the Chief Justice under Section 11 (6) 
of the Act, is the question arising for consideration in this case. 
The scope of Section 8(3) of the Act is also an ancillary issue. 
3. Appellants are defendant nos. 1, 2, 3 in Special Suit No. 
F · 211 of 2009 on the file of Civil Judge Senior Division at 
Aurangabad, Maharashtra. The suit is filed by a partnership 
firm, viz., M/s. Rana Sahebram Mannulal and three others. The 
dispute mainly pertains to the partnership business. Following 
are the reliefs claimed: 
G 
H 
"A) 
The special civil suit of the plaintiffs may kindly be 
decreed with costs; 
8) 
The plaintiffs may kindly be declared as valid 
partners of the registered partnership firm under the 
ANIL S/O JAGANNATH RANA v. RAJENDRA S/O 
555 
RADHAKISHAN RANA [KURIAN, J.] 
name and style Mis S.M. Rana {Rana Sahebram 
A 
Mannulal) and further it also may kindly be declared 
that, the plaintiffs are the owners and possessors 
of the land gut no. 240 situated at Dahegaon Tq. 
Gangapur to the extent of 81 Rand the land gut No. 
237 to the extent of 5H. 85R. situated· at Dahegaon 
B 
Tq. Gangapur dist. Aurangabad and the land gut no. 
9712 admeasuring .1 Acre 34R. situated at 
Shranapur Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad and Gut No. 
121 admeasuring 1 H. 14R. situated at village 
Tisgaon Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad and the Plot No. c 
12 out of the land Gut No. 17/2 admeasuring 5.30R. 
situated at Garkheda Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad and 
it may also be further declared the said property 
belongs to the partnership firm and the plaintiffs are 
the owners and possessors of the said property 
D 
being the valid partners of the registered firm and 
it may also be declared that the plaintiffs are the 
owners of their respective shares in the said 
properties. 
C) 
It may kindly be declared that the registered sale 
E 
deeds dated 1.8.2007 executed by defendant no.1 
in favour of defendant no.2 in respect of land gut 
no.240 to the extent of 81 R. situated at village 
Dahegaon Tq. Gangapur Dist. Aurangabad bearing 
registration Nos.3942/2007 and the registered sale 
F 
deed dated 6.9.2007 bearing registration No.4506/ 
2007 in respect of land gut no.237 to the extent of 
2H. 82R, situated at village Dahegaon Tq.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.