Eviction petitions under rent control laws are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Rent Controller and not arbitrable.

JUDGMENT :

Vikram Aggarwal, J.

The present revision petition assails the order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Court of learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana vide which the application moved by the present petitioner under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short '1996 Act') for referring the matter to arbitration was dismissed.

2. A petition under the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 (for short 'the 1995 Act') was instituted by the respondents/landlords against the petitioners/tenants for their eviction from the demised premises situated in Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana (fully described in the eviction petition) on the ground of non-payment of Rent of Rs.1,31,61,814/-. An application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act (Annexure P-4) was moved stating that parties to the eviction petition were governed by lease deed dated 15.12.2015 which contained a specific arbitration agreement (Article 20) as per which, all disputes would be referred for arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator. This application was opposed by way of reply (Annexure P-5) stating that eviction petitions could not be taken up by the Arbitrator in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India. The said application has been dismissed by way of the impugned order, leading to the filing of the present revision petition.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the arbitration agreement between the parties, the matter was required to be referred for arbitration. He has referred to the lease deed (Annexure P-1). He further submits that there is already an arbitral award between the parties which was passed on 08.10.2021 (Annexure P-6) and under the circumstances, the matter was required to be referred for arbitration. Learned counsel submits that the Court of learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana erred in dismissing the application moved by the petitioners/tenants and, therefore, the order is not sustainable.

5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and find the same to be devoid of merit.

6. The lease deed is on record as Annexure P-1. The same is a registered lease deed and admittedly, it contains an arbitration agreement.

ARTICLE 20

ARBITRATION

A. Any dispute arising howsoever in connection with the interpretation or implementation or purported termination of this Agreement, the Parties shall attempt in the first instance to resolve such dispute by friendly consultations.

B. If such dispute is not resolved through friendly consultations within 2 Weeks after commencement of discussions or such longer period as the Parties agree to in writing, then any Party may refer the dispute for resolution by arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 .

C. Any dispute arising between Lessor and Lessee arising out of or in connection with termination of this agreement, other than the dispute related to payment of rent and on no occasion the payment of rent will be stopped by the Lessee, shall initially be resolved by amicable negotiations amongst senior executives of the Parties and, if not resolved through such negotiations within 30 (thirty) days of written notice of the existence of such dispute, be finally settled by binding arbitration as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended from time to time, by a tribunal comprising 3 (three) arbitrators. Each Party to the arbitration shall appoint 1 (one) arbitrator and the 2 (two) arbitrators thus appointed shall appoint the third arbitrator who will act as a presiding arbitrator of the tribunal (together forming the