LexCENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION & ANR. versus M/S SIDHARTHA TILES & SANITARY PVT. LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 1748 : 2024 INSC 805 Central Warehousing Corporation & Anr. v. M/s Sidhartha Tiles & Sanitary Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 11723 of 2024) 21 October 2024 [Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha* and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Appellant, which is a statutory body under the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962 and Respondent, a company, entered into a lease agreement for leasing storage space for a period of three years. Clause 16 of the agreement incorporated the arbitration clause. Dispute arose between the parties on the issue of revised storage charges and renewal of agreement. Appellant invoked the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 for eviction of Respondent from its premises. Respondent invoked arbitration by filing an application under Section 11(6) of the Act for the appointment of an arbitrator. High Court after hearing the matter came to the conclusion that the claims made in the notice followed by the application under Section 11 are clearly covered by the arbitration clause. Aggrieved, Appellant challenged the legality of the High Court order by filing the present SLP. Whether the Public Premises Act, 1971 overrides the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and if the answer is in negative, whether the High Court committed any error in appointing the arbitrator while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Headnotes† Whether the Public Premises Act, 1971 overrides the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Held: The dispute that is raised in the Section 11 application relate to promises and reciprocal promises arising out of the agreement dated 26.09.2012 – The right of renewal as well as the legality and propriety of the enhanced demand arose during the subsistence of the agreement – On the other hand, the Public * Author [2024] 10 S.C.R. 1749 Central Warehousing Corporation & Anr. v. M/s Sidhartha Tiles & Sanitary Pvt. Ltd. Premises Act authorises the ejectment of a tenant in unauthorised occupation of public premises and for consequential directions – The Public Premises Act would not even cast a shadow on this period – In so far as the dispute relating to this right of renewal is concerned, it depends on the terms of the agreement – The Public Premises Act neither bars nor overlaps with the scope and ambit of proceedings that were initiated under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. [Para 13] Whether the High Court committed any error in appointing the arbitrator while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 11: Held: The revision of storage charges occurred during the subsistence of the contract – Its legality and propriety will depend on the terms of the agreement dated 26.09.2012 – Similarly, the right of renewal will also be based on and a construct of the said agreement – These two disputes will undoubtedly arise out of the agreement between the parties and the resolution of such disputes is clearly covered by the arbitration clause – After the recent decision of this court in SBI General Insurance Co. the remit of the referral court to consider an application under Section 11(6) is clear and unambiguous – For the reasons stated above, the petition is rejected and the appellant must bear the costs for this unnecessary litigation quantified at Rs. 50,000/- – Arbitral tribunal shall resume the proceedings and endeavour to deliver the award as expeditiously as possible. [Para 14,15 and 16] Case Law Cited SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Krish Spinning [2024] 7 SCR 840 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1754 – referred to. List of Acts Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, The Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962. List of Keywords Arbitration; Lease agreement; Arbitration clause; Central Warehousing Corporation; Application under section 11; Appointment of arbitrator; Public Premises Act, 1971; Dispute resolution; Interpretation of agreement. 1750 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 11723 of 2024 [From the Judgment and Order dated 11.02.2022 of the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in ARBA No. 140 of 2015] Appearances for Parties Ashish Kumar Tiwari, Anurag Tiwari, Sahib Patel, Advs. for the Appellants. B.K.Choudhary, S. Balachander, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advs. for the Respon
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.