RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.
Big Shoppers Supermarket Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
K.M. Trading and Agencies Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
S.B. Arbitration Application No. 49 of 2007.
Decided On : 29-08-2008
Arbitration - Termination of Tenancy - Rajasthan Rent Control Act,2001 - Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 - [Specific Performance, Termination of Tenancy, Decree for Eviction] - [Section 18, Section 9, Section 29, Section 2(3) of Rajasthan Rent Control Act,2001] - The court held that the Arbitrator cannot resolve whether the landlord is entitled to a decree for eviction under the Rent Act, as it is the jurisdiction of the Rent Tribunal. The provisions of the Rent Act have overriding effect over other laws, including arbitration agreement. The court dismissed the application for appointment of Sole Arbitrator.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a registered company, sought to appoint a sole arbitrator under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. The dispute arose from the termination of tenancy and eviction of the tenant by the respondent landlord.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Rent Tribunal has the jurisdiction to resolve disputes between landlord and tenant, and the satisfaction of the Rent Tribunal is necessary before ordering eviction of the tenant. The court dismissed the application for appointment of Sole Arbitrator, stating that the Arbitrator cannot resolve whether the landlord is entitled to a decree for eviction under the Rent Act.
Issues: The issues included the entitlement to specific performance of the contract, the validity of the notice of terminating tenancy, and the entitlement to a decree for eviction as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Rent control Act,2001.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the Rent Act have overriding effect over other laws, including arbitration agreement, and that the Arbitrator cannot resolve whether the landlord is entitled to a decree for eviction under the Rent Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application for appointment of Sole Arbitrator.
a) Whether the applicant is entitled to the specific performance of the contract viz.for asking the respondent to submit the lease deed for registration and get it registered?
b) In case decree for specific performance is granted, what is the effect of the decree for specific performance on the notice dated June 19, 2007 served by the lesser upon the Lessee?
c) Whether notice of terminating tenancy is valid?
d) Whether the lessor is entitled to a decree for eviction as per the provisions of the Rajasthan Rent control Act,2001?
Therefore the applicant company preferred the instant application for appointment of Sole Arbitrator.
(i) The applicant has not filed original arbitration agreement along with the application, therefore, in view of section 8 of 1996 Act the application is not maintainable.
(ii) The dispute between the parties is regarding termination of tenancy and eviction of tenant applicant. The dispute can only be decided by Rent Tribunal under the provisions of Rajasthan Rent Control Act,2001 (for short `Rent Act') and such matter cannot be rendered for arbitration. As per Section 18 of Rent Act no Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide the matter between landlord and tenant. As per Section 9 of Rent Act for the eviction of tenant the satisfaction of Rent Tribunal is necessary and it does not require satisfaction of any o
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.