Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A. No. 685 of 2016 in O.S. No. 4656 of 2015 on the file of the V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the plaintiff has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

2. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S. No. 4656 of 2015 for declaration and permanent injunction.

3. In the said suit, the 3rd defendant filed an application in I.A. No. 685 of 2016 under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to refer the parties to Arbitration in terms of the Arbitration Clause contained in Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution and By-laws of the Lions Club International.

4. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the 3rd defendant has stated that the suit itself is not maintainable for the simple reason that the Constitution of the Lions Club stipulates Arbitration of all disputes and complaints relating to the interpretation of the Constitution and By-laws by the Multiple District Council, therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration and injunction is not maintainable before the Civil Court and that the dispute can be resolved only by the Arbitrator as stated under Article VI Section 1 of the Constitution and By-laws.

5. The plaintiff filed his counter disputing the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition stating that under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, there must be a valid Arbitration Agreement between the parties under Section 7 of the said Act. Further, he has stated that Article VI Section 4 is misconceived and equally misplaced with reference to Article XV. The plaintiff has stated that the provisions of Article VI and Article XV speak about the internal alternate dispute resolution mechanism, which does not prohibit or restrain a member from resorting to Court of law. Further, the plaintiff has stated that in paragraph-20 of the plaint he has stated how the “internal dispute mechanism” miserably failed, forcing the plaintiff to come before the Civil Court. The plaintiff has also stated that the Constitution and By-laws of the Lions Club International, Multiple or District or the individual Clubs can at best be a contract between the club and members regulation and it cannot be a Arbitration Agreement, therefore, the provisions of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act are not applicable.

6. In the reply filed by the 3rd defendant, they have stated that the By-laws of an Association is a contract between the Association and the members, which contains a clear Arbitration Clause to resolve the internal disputes. Therefore, according to the 3rd defendant, the contract viz., By-laws, which contains the Arbitration Clause is well within the ambit of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

7. The trial Court, after taking into consideration the case of both parties, allowed the application and the parties were referred to Arbitration in terms of the Arbitration Clause in Article VI Section 4 of the Constitution and By-laws of the Lions Club International.

8. Aggrieved over the fair and decreetal order passed by the trial Court, the plaintiff has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

9. Heard Mr. A. Gunaseelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. R. Muthukumarasamy, learned Senior Counsel for the 1st respondent, Mr. V. Lakshmi Narayanan, learned counsel for the 4th respondent, Ms. Ajmad Begum, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, Ms. Christina, learned counsel for the respondents 2 & 5 and Mr. N. Sivaprakash, learned counsel for the 6th respondent.

10. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the internal alternate dispute resolution mechanism had failed, there is no bar for the plaintiff to approach the Civil Court seeking for the relief sought for in the plaint. Further, the learned counsel submitted that in paragraph-20 of the plaint, the plaintiff had categorically stated how the internal dispute mechanism had failed, forcing the