Tarun Kumar Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS revisional application is directed against order dated 19th May, 2011 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 5th Court at Alipore in Title Suit No. 209 of 2009. The petitioner as the plaintiff filed one suit being Title Suit No. 209 of 2009 in the Court below against the O.P. defendant for eviction on the ground of non -payment of rent and facility charges payable by the defendant in accordance with terms and conditions as laid down in the tenancy agreement dated 1st of March, 2005 as well as facility agreement dated 1st of March, 2005 (hereafter to be referred as first agreement and second agreement respectively) entered into in between the predecessor -in -title of the petitioner plaintiff and the O.P. defendant.
(2.) THE O.P. defendant appeared in said suit and filed an application under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act of 1996) alleging that the entire dispute was referable to an arbitrator under said Act of 1996 in view of a specific arbitration clause appearing in the first agreement which also covered the second agreement. After contested hearing learned Trial Court passed the order impugned by allowing said application under section 8 of the Act of 1996 by observing that the entire dispute was covered by the arbitration clause and hence was referable to the arbitrator. Mr. Debnath Ghosh; learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff petitioner, has assailed the order impugned on the following grounds.
(3.) ACCORDING to him, though the agreement of tenancy dated 1st of March, 2005 contained an arbitration clause but the facility agreement of the same date did not contain any arbitration clause. According to him, the petitioner plaintiff filed the suit for eviction under the Transfer of Property Act for non -payment of both the lease rents etc. covered by the first agreement as well as facility charges covered by the second agreement. He submits that as a composite suit was filed touching both the agreements, one having an arbitration clause, and the other having no such arbitration clause, in that case there was no question of either severing the dispute covered by arbitration clause for referring the matter to the arbitrator or for referring the entire dispute to the arbitrator in view of an arbitration clause present in only one of the agreements.;