Full Text
Translation output
/ i.9 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARB.A. 6/2009
M/S PERFECT FOODS Appellant
Through; Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, adv.
ARB.A. 6/2009
M/S PERFECT FOODS Appellant
Through; Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, adv.
VERSUS
M/S BELTEK CANADIAN WATER LTD Respondent
Through;
Through;
CORAM;
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
16.09.2009 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against an order of learned Arbitrator dated 16^^ March, 2009 whereby the Arbitrator refused to stay the proceedings. The matter to the Arbitrator was referred under the directions of this Court and the Arbitrator is ceased with the claim and counter claim of the parties. The appellant however simultaneously filed a civil suit in respect of the same claim which is also proceeding before the Civil Judge. The appellant wants that the proceedings before the Arbitrator should be stayed on the ground that the subject matter of his claim and the subject matter of the civil suit are same. Proceedings before the Arbitrator are not only in respect of the subject matter of the claim of the appellant but they are also in respect of the counter claim of the respondent therefore
2009:DHC:5806 J proceedings before the Arbitrator were rightly not stayed by the Arbitrator. However, the proceedings initiated by the appellant are in two forums; one before the Civil Judge and other before the Arbitrator. It Is the claim of the appellant that both these proceedings are In respect of the same subject matter. It is for the appellant to choose where he wants to continue the proceedings as he cannot continue same claim In two forums, i.e., one before the Arbitrator and other before the
Civil judge. So the appellant has a choice to withdraw his claim either before he Arbitrator so that the Arbitrator may proceed with the counter claim of the respondent or he may withdraw his suit before the Civil judge since subject matter of claim before both the forums are same. It is for the appellant to exercise the choice. He cannot come to the Court with a prayer that proceedings before the Arbitrator should be
'4|. stayed.
The appeal is therefore hereby dismissed.
SHIV NARAYAN
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 ak 2009:DHC:5806
16.09.2009 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against an order of learned Arbitrator dated 16^^ March, 2009 whereby the Arbitrator refused to stay the proceedings. The matter to the Arbitrator was referred under the directions of this Court and the Arbitrator is ceased with the claim and counter claim of the parties. The appellant however simultaneously filed a civil suit in respect of the same claim which is also proceeding before the Civil Judge. The appellant wants that the proceedings before the Arbitrator should be stayed on the ground that the subject matter of his claim and the subject matter of the civil suit are same. Proceedings before the Arbitrator are not only in respect of the subject matter of the claim of the appellant but they are also in respect of the counter claim of the respondent therefore
2009:DHC:5806 J proceedings before the Arbitrator were rightly not stayed by the Arbitrator. However, the proceedings initiated by the appellant are in two forums; one before the Civil Judge and other before the Arbitrator. It Is the claim of the appellant that both these proceedings are In respect of the same subject matter. It is for the appellant to choose where he wants to continue the proceedings as he cannot continue same claim In two forums, i.e., one before the Arbitrator and other before the
Civil judge. So the appellant has a choice to withdraw his claim either before he Arbitrator so that the Arbitrator may proceed with the counter claim of the respondent or he may withdraw his suit before the Civil judge since subject matter of claim before both the forums are same. It is for the appellant to exercise the choice. He cannot come to the Court with a prayer that proceedings before the Arbitrator should be
'4|. stayed.
The appeal is therefore hereby dismissed.
SHIV NARAYAN
SEPTEMBER 16, 2009 ak 2009:DHC:5806
JUDGMENT