The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's interpretation of the arbitration clauses in the agreements and the application of Section 8 of the arbitration act to refer the dispute to arbitration based on the existence of a valid arbitration agreement.

JUDGMENT

Bharati Dangre, J. - The petitioners before this court are the original plaintiffs, who have instituted S.C. Suit No.1512 of 2021 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division at Vadgaon, Pune seeking a declaration that the registered deed of conveyance is null and void as it is against the interest of the plaintiffs and for cancellation and termination of various agreements set out in prayer clauses (b) and (c) of the plaint.

2. On the suit being filed, defendant Nos.1 and 2 took out an application under Section 8 of the arbitration & Conciliation act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the arbitration act'), for referring the dispute raised in the suit for arbitration, in terms of the arbitration clause contained in agreement dated 31/03/2007 read with agreement dated 25/07/2008 read along with the provisions of the arbitration act.

3. The clauses contained in the respective agreements, which form basis of the application filed by the defendant Nos.1 and 2, read as under:

'Clause No.21(B) - It is agreed between parties that in the event of any disputes or differences the parties hereto in relation to this agreement or in relation to any matter touching or arising from this agreement, the parties shall refer such disputes and differences to the arbitration under the provisions of the arbitration and Reconciliation act, 1996 or any statutory modifications thereof. Clause No.21(C) - The venue of such arbitration shall be at Mumbai and the court at Mumbai alone shall have jurisdiction.'

Similarly, clauses No.23.2 & 23.3 of the agreement dated 25th July, 2008 states as under:

'Clause No.23.2 It is agreed between parties that in the event of any disputes or differences the parties hereto in relation to this agreement or in relation to any matter touching or arising from this agreement, the parties shall refer such disputes and differences to the arbitration under the provisions of the arbitration and Reconciliation act, 1996 or any statutory modifications thereof.

Clause No.23.3 The venue for such arbitration shall be at Mumbai and the court at Mumbai alone shall have jurisdiction.'

4. The application was opposed by the plaintiffs by filing their response vide Ex-27 by pleading that the suit filed by the plaintiffs related to cancellation of agreements and termination of development agreement on the grounds, inter alia of abuse. It was pleaded that the arbitration agreement sought to be relied upon by the defendants are only brought on record to demonstrate the history of business relationship between late Shivkumar Daga and defendant Nos.1 and 2. It was pleaded that the relationship which existed, ceased to exist upon demise of late SD on 08/05/2011 when the plaintiff No.1 Sushma Daga was re-inducted as director with effect from 13/06/2011 and she transferred her share and exited from defendant No.2-Company and further resigned from it. It was, therefore, pleaded that the inter se relationship between the parties i.e. late SD, plaintiff No.1 and defendant Nos.1 and 2 have come to an end. The application was also opposed on the ground that the dispute pertains to adjudication of powers of defendant Nos.1 and 2 to execute the conveyance and, therefore, there is no arbitration agreement, which would govern the relationship between the parties.

5. Upon consideration of the rival claims, the 3rd Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vadgaon, at Pune by order dated 13/10/2021 allowed the application filed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 (Ex-14 and Ex-22) and referred the dispute to arbitration as per Section 8 of the arbitration act.

6. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that the learned Judge has extensively focused on the power conferred under Section 8 of the arbitration act to refer the parties to arbitration, where there is an arbitration clause and by taking note of Section 16 of the arbitration act, in the backdrop of the facts, he attempted to determine whether a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties. By referring to the ag