SUNEET KUMAR,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) Petitioner/defendant is seeking rejection of the plaint of Original Suit No. 41 of 2003, Kamalkant Automobiles v. Kshetriya Nideshak, pending before Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hathras. The controversy arises out of an order dated 28 September 2006, whereby, the court below rejected the application moved under Section 5 read with Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (Act, 1996)
(3.) The plaintiff/respondent a proprietorship firm, was appointed dealer by the petitioner Corporation dealing in petroleum products. The Adulteration Cell carried inspection of the retail outlet on 11 February 2003 and found the unit delivering 250 ml short per 5 litres High Speed Diesel (HSD). Consequently, the retail outlet was suspended. Aggrieved, respondent instituted a suit seeking declaratory reliefs against the inspection and suspension. An ex-parte interim injunction order was passed directing the petitioner to continue the supply of petroleum products in terms of the contract. Petitioner entered appearance and filed an application under Section 8 of the Act, 1996 requesting the court to refer the matter to the arbitrator in terms of Clause 66 of the Dealership Agreement dated 13 April 2002.;