The intention of the parties to refer disputes to arbitration can be inferred from the clauses in the Agreement and resolution, and the suit may be deemed not maintainable based on such clauses.

R. Subbiah, J.

1. O.A.No.39 of 2012is filed by the applicants/plaintiffs to pass an order of interim injunction retraining respondents 1 to 3 Association and its members from modifying the remittance i.e. payment frequency of the applicants from fortnightly to any shorter period, pending disposal of the above suit.

Application No.1255 of 2012is filed by the applicants/ defendants 1 to 3 to refer the parties to arbitration and consequently dismiss the suit.

Application No.1630 of 2012is filed by the applicant/proposed 5th defendant, namely, Austrian Airlines, to implead them as 5th defendant in the suit.

2. The brief facts, which are necessary to decide all the applications, are as follows:

According to the plaintiffs, they are engaged, inter alia, in the business of providing travel services including air ticketing of all airlines, such as Air India, Lufthansa, Jet Airways, etc. The plaintiffs are International Air Transport Association (IATA) accredited agent having office at Chennai and conducting their business in Chennai. The 1st defendant Association incorporated under a special Act of the Canadian Parliament on 18.12.1945 is a world organization of scheduled airlines and it has some 230 members/airline entities from 126 Nations in every part of the globe. The members of the 1st defendant Association carry the bulk of the world's scheduled International and domestic air traffic. The 1st defendant inter alia, provides a platform for coordination as between airline entities and travel agents. The membership is available only for airline entities and the travel agents are given approval through IATA accreditation programme. Only IATA accredited agents are permitted to act as agents of member airlines for the reservation, issuance, cancellation, etc. of their air tickets. The 2nd defendant is the country office in India. The 3rd defendant is the Chennai office of the 1st defendant. For the last 30 years, the 1st defendant has billed the plaintiffs twice every month thereby granting a credit period of 15 days for the payment of the sale proceeds. This system has worked effectively and the plaintiffs have been prompt in making the payment to the 1st defendant.

3. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that few years ago, with the advent of the internet, many passengers started directly purchasing airline tickets through the internet from the airlines directly or through travel portals such as makemytrip.com, yatra.com.etc. While so, three members of the 1st defendant association submitted a proposal to the 1st defendant's Conference to vary the payment frequency to weekly from fortnight. Based on the same, the 1st defendant has circulated a mail vote for approval of the members not present in the Conference for their approval of the proposed modification. Thereafter, the 1st defendant has attempted to modify the remittance frequency in breach of the resolutions to the prejudice of the plaintiffs. Hence, they filed the suit as against the 1st defendant for injunction restraining them from modifying the remittance i.e. payment frequency of the plaintiffs from fortnightly to any shorter period in breach of the Passenger Agency Conference Resolutions.

4. On appearance, defendants 1 to 3 filed an application in A.No.1255 of 2012 under section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, stating that the plaintiffs trade relationship with the defendants is governed by the separate passengers Sales Agency Agreements (PSA) dated 01.09.1997, 2.12.1999, 27.10.1995 and 09.01.2004 signed respectively by each of the plaintiffs 1 to 3 with defendants 1 to 3. Clause 14 of the agreement contains the Arbitration clause. Clause 2.1(a) of the PSA stipulates that the terms and conditions governing the relationship between the Carrier and the Agent are as set forth in the Resolutions contained in the Travel Agent's Hand Book as published from time to time under the authority of the Agency Administrator. Resolution 820-e provides for revie