S. VENKATARAMAN, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant who is the defendantant in the lower Court is aggrieved by an order of temporany injunction granted by the lower court restraining him and the arbitrator who is the 2nd defendant in the lower Court from taking any further action pursuant to the notice dated 30-10-1995 issued in case. No. 3/95 on the file of the arbitrator either by filing the alleged award in the Civil Court or taking any further action under Section 114 of the Arbitration Act, pending disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) THE appellant which is a small scale industry had entered into an agreement with the respondent/plaintiff for supply of power to its unit. According to the appellant though the respodent had to instal 200 amps fuses in the pole while supplying the power, only 100 amps fuses were put as a result of which the imported Dixon plant could not be run properly. It is stated that the respondent had illegally disconnected the power supply. There were several litigations between the parties reference to which is not necessary for the purpose of this case. The appellant's case is that because of the failure of the respondent to instal 200 amps fuses it suffered losses and that the respondent by installing only 100 amps fuses had restricted the power supply to its unit. The appellant sought for statutory arbitration under Section 52 of the Indian Electricity Act. ( hereinafter referred to as 'act) in respect of his claim for damages of Rs. 55 lakhs purporting to be under Sections19 (2) and 21 (4) of the Act. The appellant issued a notice to the respondent to nominate their arbitrator while the appellant nominated the 2nd defendant as its arbitrator. The respondent without nominating any arbitrator wrote to the 2nd defendant that the dispute raised by the appellant was not arbitrable as Sections 19 (2) and 21 (4) of the Act were not applicable to the appellnt's claim and requesting him to decline to enter upon the proposed arbitration. The 2nd defendant however entered upon the arbitration and passed an award dated 30-10-1994 upholding the appellant's claim for damages of Rs. 55,00,000/ -. The arbitrator issued notice to the respondent of the passing of the award on the same day.

( 3 ) ON receipt of the notice from the arbitrator the respondent has filed the suit for a declaration that the provisions of Sections 19 (2) and 21 (4) and Section 52 of the Act do not confer any right on the appellant to initiate arbitration proceedings claiming compensation that the proceedings initiated by the 2nd defendant and the award passed by him are illegal, void and unenforceable. According to the respondent, the claim made by the appellant is not at all arbitrable under the provisions of the Act and as such the arbitration proceedings and the award are without jurisdiction and void.

( 4 ) ALONG with the suit the respondent also sought for temporary injunction to restrain the arbitrator from filing the award and restraining the appellant from taking any steps in pursuance of that award. The appellant opposed the repondent's prayer contending that the suit itself is barred under Section 32 of the Arbitration Act and that as already the award had been filed in Court by the arbitrator nothing remained to be done and that if at all the respondent had to approach the Court under the Arbitration Act to challenge the award.

( 5 ) THE trial Court has held that the plaintiff's suit is maintainable and that the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience was in favour of granting the temporary injunction. Accordingly the trial court has granted the temporary injunction sought for

( 6 ) THE partner of the appellant who argued in person contended that this claim is made under Sections 29 (2) and 21 (4) of the Act on the ground that the respondent had controlled and interfered with the supply of power causing damages to the appellant that this claim is arbitrable; that at any rate the question whether the appellant's cl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document