2009 Supreme(Mad) 3439
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH
NEPC India Ltd., rep. by its Chairman, Mr. Ravi Prakash Khemka
Versus
Southern Wind Farms (P) Ltd., rep. by its Director, Mr. Khandelwal
O.S.A.No.317 of 2008
Decided on: 31-08-2009
For the Appellant:P. Shanmugham, Advocate.
For the Respondent:V. Raghavachari for P. Valliappan, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that disputes falling within the purview of Arbitral proceedings as per the agreement cannot be pursued in a civil court, and reliefs sought inter-linked with immovable property may not be granted jurisdictionally.
Headnote:
Jurisdiction - Wind Energy Division - Clause 25 of Agreement - Arbitral Proceedings - [Wind Energy Division] - [Clause 25 of the Agreement] - [Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996] - The court upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge to dismiss the application seeking leave to file a Suit, based on the grounds that the dispute fell within the purview of the Arbitral proceedings as per Clause 25 of the Agreement and that the reliefs sought were inter-linked with the immovable property.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff sought leave to file a Suit for injunction and mandatory injunction related to the Wind Energy Division, including immovable property and movable properties. The defendant contended that the Suit was for taking control of the Wind Energy Division, which indirectly made a claim over the immovable property. The learned Single Judge dismissed the application, leading to this Appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The Court confirmed the decision of the learned Single Judge, stating that the dispute fell within the purview of the Arbitral proceedings as per Clause 25 of the Agreement and that the reliefs sought were inter-linked with the immovable property.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the Court, Interpretation of the Agreement, Inter-linkage of Reliefs with Immovable Property
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the dispute fell within the purview of the Arbitral proceedings as per Clause 25 of the Agreement and that the reliefs sought were inter-linked with the immovable property, leading to the dismissal of the application seeking leave to file a Suit.
Final Decision: The order passed by the learned Single Judge was confirmed, and the Appeal was dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their costs.
M. Chockalingam, J.
1. Challenge is made to an order of the learned Single Judge in Application No.1857 of 2008 whereby the Appellant/applicant seeking leave to file a Suit was dismissed.
2. The Court heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also for the respondent.
3. The plaintiff/appellant has sought the leave or the Court stating that it was a Suit for injunction and not for adjudication of title or delivery of possession. The Suit was filed to restrain the respondent and their men from utilizing, either for commercial purpose or for any other purpose, the Wind Energy Technology and its designs and drawings and from making any claim under the agreement dated 11. 2006. The Suit was also filed for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to transfer/hand over the entire title deeds/original documents pertaining to the immovable property as described in Schedule-I to the Plaint along with the R.C. Books pertaining to 75 vehicles belonging to Wind Energy Division of the plaintiff as detailed in Schedule-I. Apart from the above, the plaintiff has also asked for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from alienating, encumbering, leasing or disposing of or dealing with the property as described in Schedule-I and 11 belonging the plaintiffs and the Wind Energy Division either directly or indirectly along with the properties, if any secured from any Government in Indian territory on the strength of the agreement dated 11. 2006.
4. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellant before the learned Single Judge and equally before this Court that the Suit is basically not for immovable property, part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court and the appellant is entitled to seek leave to file the Suit.
5. On the contrary, it was contended by the respondent side before the Trial Court and equally here also that the Suit is one for taking the entire control of the Wind Energy Division is dispute which consists of immovable properties. The Suit itself is framed for making claim in respect of the Wind Energy Division which indirectly make a claim over the immovable property. The plaintiff has virtually sought for the relief to have control over the entire Energy Division and under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, the Court lacked the jurisdiction to deal with the matter and hence, leave to file a Suit should not be granted.
6. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides has taken a view that it is not a fit case for grant of leave as asked for by the appellant/plaintiff and dismissed the same. Hence, this Appeal.
7. The learned counsel on either side reiterated the contentions raised before the learned Single Judge.
8. As could be seen above, the plaintiff/appellant has sought for permanent injunction restraining the respondent from using/utilizing, either for commercial purpose or for any other purpose, the Wind Energy Technology or its designs, drawings, etc. over the Wind Energy Division including the immovable property and movable properties and other permanent injunction, mandatory injunction have been sought for as seen above.
9. From the very reading of the Plaint averment, it would be quite clear that the entire case of the plaintiff and the relief sought for rest upon the agreement entered between the parties on 11. 2006 which according to the plaintiff was unenforceable agreement. The learned counsel for the appellant took the Court to Clause 1 of the agreement which reads as follows.
"Wind Energy means business of the NEPC located at 35 & 36, Wallajah Road, Chennai-600 002, pertaining to manufacturing, selling, importing, exporting, supplying and dealing in all kinds of power generation equipments including turbine generators, windmills and turbines, hydro-turbines, thermal turbines, solar modules and panels, substations, including acquisition of land for development of the business of Wind Energy Division and as a part of its incidental business offering ope