B. Seshasayana Reddy, J.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 10.08.1998 passed in O.S.No.955 of 1991 on the file of IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder the learned Senior Civil Judge decreed the suit and appointed an arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences in respect of agreement dated 14.02.1990.

2. Facts in a nutshell necessary for appreciating the question involved in this appeal may be stated: Goddila Chinnappa Reddy-plaintiff is an agriculturist carrying on agriculture in plantation of props of Eucalyptus at Vanamaladinne village, Punganur Mandal, Chittoor District. He sought the services of the A.P. Forest Development Corporation for marketing Eucalyptus props. An agreement dated 14.02.1990 came to be executed between the parties. Some disputes arose regarding payment of amount for the props supplied by the plaintiff. Since the agreement dated 14.02.1990 contained an arbitration clause, the plaintiff requested the defendants to refer the claims to the designated officer for adjudicating the disputes and differences. The defendants neither replied nor referred the matter to the designated officer i.e. the Vice Chairman and Managing Director, A.P. Forest Development Corporation, Hyderabad-3rd defendant.

Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit before IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, seeking the following reliefs:

a) The defendant be directed to file into court the original agreement dated 14-2-90 between the plaintiff and defendant.

b) Arbitrator be appointed for the purpose of resolving the dispute and difference between the plaintiff and the defendant relating to the claim of the plaintiff.

c) Appropriate directions be given to the Arbitrator to decide the dispute and differences, between the plaintiff and the defendant relating to the claim of the plaintiff including awarding of interest @ 24% p.a., and such amounts found to be payable by the defendant from the date of supply in accordance with law.

d) Arbitrator be directed to make the award file the same into court and thereafter appropriate directions be given in accordance with law for making said award rule of the court.

e) Cost of the entire proceedings be awarded to the plaintiff and

f) Any other relief to which the plaintiff is entitled be granted and pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice."

3. The 3rd defendant filed written statement and defendants 1 and 2 filed memo adopting the written statement of the 3rd respondent. Execution of the agreement dated 14.02.1990 and supply of Eucalyptus props by the plaintiff under the said agreement are not disputed. The claim of the plaintiff as such is disputed. The defendants also raised objection with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the Courts situated in Hyderabad.

4. The trial Court framed the following points for consideration:

1) Whether there are any disputes and differences between the parties, if so, whether an Arbitrator should be appointed to decide the claim of the plaintiff under the terms of the agreement dt.14-2-90?

2) Whether this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit?

3) To what relief?

5. On behalf of the plaintiff, he got marked 6 documents as Exs.A1 to A6. On behalf of the defendants, they did not choose to adduce any evidence, either ocular or documentary.

6. Learned Senior Civil Judge, on appreciation of the evidence brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, came to the conclusion that the disputes and differences arose between the parties are required to be adjudicated by an arbitrator as per the terms of the agreement and that the Courts in Hyderabad have jurisdiction since the 3rd defendant Corporation has principal office at Hyderabad. With the above conclusions, the learned Senior Civil Judge proceeded to decree the suit and appoint Sri M.Markandeya, Retd. Di