The presence of an arbitration clause in a contract mandates referral of disputes to arbitration, establishing a preference for alternative remedies over court adjudication.

JUDGMENT

R.Narayana Pisharadi, J.

The dispute in this appeal relates to the termination of the contract which was awarded to the appellant by the first respondent Indian Oil Corporation as per Ext.P2 letter dated 16.4.2015 issued by the fourth respondent. The work related to haulage, cartage, clearing, house keeping and other miscellaneous work in the L.P.G. bottling plant of the Indian Oil Corporation at Kochi. The contract was for a period of two years which could be extended for one more year. After the completion of two years, as per Ext.P4 dated 27.4.2017, the term of the contract was extended for another one year. Thereafter, the third respondent issued Exts.P9 to P11 notices to the appellant to sort out the labour problems that arose during the period. The appellant gave Ext.P13 reply dated 3.5.2017 to the notices issued to him. On the next day, Ext.P15 notice was issued to the appellant to show cause why the contract shall not be terminated. Thereafter, the appellant gave Ext.P16 reply dated 18.5.2017. Thereafter, the third respondent terminated the contract as per Ext.P18 letter dated 16.6.2017. The appellant then gave Ext.R1(a) notice dated 11.7.2017 for referring the matter to arbitration. Thereafter he filed W.P.(C) No.23599 of 2017 challenging the termination of the contract awarded to him. As per the WA 2252/2017 2 impugned judgment, the learned single Judge found that since the matter had already been referred to arbitration, it is not proper for this Court to adjudicate on the illegality of the termination of the contract especially when factual disputes are to be decided. The learned single Judge also observed that in view of the effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner, the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court need not be exercised to interfere with the termination of the contract.

Challenging the aforesaid judgment this appeal is filed.

2. We heard at length Dr.K.P.Satheesan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, Sri E.K.Nandakumar, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri T.K.Radhakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent.

3. During the course of the hearing, it was brought to our notice that respondents 1 to 4 had given a panel containing the names of three former District Judges out of whom one is to be nominated as the Arbitrator and that the appellant had in turn named another former District Judge to be chosen as the Arbitrator. It has also been submitted at the Bar that no Arbitrator has yet been appointed. Since the contract contains an arbitration clause and since the appellant himself has chosen the remedy of arbitration, we find that it is not necessary now to deal with the rival contentions of the parties and to go deep into the questions involved in the matter. After interaction WA 2252/2017 3 with the learned counsel, we suggested the name of Sri Justice K.Ramakrishnan, former Judge of this court as the Arbitrator. Learned counsel for all parties submitted that Sri Justice K.Ramakrishnan, former Judge of this Court can be appointed and they have no objection to him being appointed as the Arbitrator in the matter. Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal by referring the dispute to arbitration. We appoint Sri Justice K.Ramakrishnan, former Judge, High Court of Kerala, “Krishnakripa”, Maaraana, Pandathil Cross Road, Eroor, Thripunithura as the Arbitrator. All the contentions of the parties are left open to be decided in the arbitration.

(P.N. Ravindran, Judge)

(R.Narayana Pisharadi, Judge)

kav/