- (1.) This revision petition is against the order of the Additional District Jule, Amritsar, whereby the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 9.6.1989 was set aside and the dispute was referred under section 20 of the Arbitration Act.
(2.) Swaran Singh filed a petition under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act against his brother Harminder Singh and Indian Explosives Ltd. As per averments in the petition, it was alleged that both the brothers were carrying on business in partnership with their father Wazir Singh under the name and style of Wazir Singh Surjit Singh & Co. This firm was the distributor of respondent No. 2 in respect of their products i.e. chemicals, rubber chemicals and all other products of the chemical division. Wazir Singh died on 10.1.1978. Wazir Singh executed a Will in favour of both the brothers and so the property relating to his share came to be possessed by both the brothers equally and this way both of them became equal partners in the distributorship. It is further case of the petitioner that his firm was converted into a Private Limited Company and this way respondent No. 1 to become a shareholder and as such was managing and conducting the business of the company. It is further case of the petitioner that respondent No. 1 Harminder Singh floated a separate concern under the name and style of M/s Wazir Singh Harminder Singh and so started getting goods from respondent No. 2. This way be started placing orders only for nominal goods in the name of the United Company. With a view to seek redressal of his grievance, the petitioner approached respondent No. 2 as respondent No. 1 was appointed as a sole distributor for rubber chemicals. The Chief Executive of respondent No. 2 gave him a patient hearing and assured him that they would consider the matter sympathetically. It is further alleged that sometime thereafter respondent No. began declaring him a full-fledged owner of M/s Wazir Singh Pvt. Ltd. This fact was brought to the notice of the chief Executive and General Manager of the chemical division of respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 25.10.1985. Keeping this in view a joint meeting of the petitioner and respondent No. 1 was held on 24.4.1986 at Hyat Regency Hotel, Delhi, in the presence of Mr. B.K. Banerjee and Mr. T.N. Sen, Chief Executive and General Manager respectively of IEL Company, wherein. it was decided that all the disputes relating to the rights of the petitioner in the distributorship of chemical division of respondent No. 2 and all other allied differences be got settled through arbitration and for this petitioner and respondent No. 1 would suggest the names of the panel of arbitrators of which-one may be acceptable to all. It is in pursuance to this settlement that the petitioner through its counsel Sh. G.T. Tutej a vide letter dated 7.6.1986 suggested the names of Sarv Sh. M.L. Verma, Harbans Singh, Retired Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, and Sh. Paramjit Singh, an Advocate of Karnal. Similarly respondent No. suggested the name of Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna, Mr. Justice Tulzapurker, Mr. Justice Krishna Iyer, all retired Judges of the Supreme Court, and Mr. Justice Gurdev Singh, retired Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. It was further alleged that the petitioner agreed to the appointment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.L. Khanna to act as an arbitrator in the matter and this way the matter entered the domain of a complete arbitration agreement. It is thereafter that Mr. T.N. Sen, General Manager of the Company, intimated that since both of you had agreed to the appointment of H.R. Khanna, J. as an arbitrator they are approaching him to give his consent. It is further alleged that despite this time lag no useful purpose has been served till today. It was further averted that there was complete arbitration agreement in respect of the following disputes :- (A) As to whether the petitioner is entitled to 1/2 share of the profits earned by respondents No. 1 in the supplies of chemicals and other products of Chemical Division of respondent No. 2 w.e.f. 1.2.1985 the date since when the goods and products were being diverted by respondent No. 1 to his concern. (B) Whether the petitioner is entitled in future to a share in the supplies of the products of chemical division of respondent No. 2. (C) What should be the share of the petitioner in the supplies of the products of rubber chemical division of respondent No. 2 in the distributorship. (D) That all the disputes between the parties i.e. the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 with regard to the distributorship of rubber chemicals in Punjab were agreed to be referred to the arbitration as envisaged in letter dated 20.6.86 written by Sh. T.N. Sen of respondent No. 2 to Sh. Harminder Singh respondent No. 1 copy of which was endorsed to the an applicant.
(3.) Since the differences have arisen between the parties, the petitioner prayed that agreement be filed in the Court and the matter be got decided through the arbitration of Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna.;