LAWS(GJH)-1982-5-1

UNION OF INDIA Vs. OWNER AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN MOTOR VESSEL M V HOEGH ORCHID

Decided On May 04, 1982
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN MOTOR VESSEL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the reasons which will be pronounced here after I am of the opinion that defendants Nos. 1 and 4 are entitled to the stay of the suit as prayed for by them in the present notice of motion taken out by them. I accordingly make the notice of motion absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) of the summons. Application is accordingly disposed of with costs.

(2.) By order of 4/05/1982 this suit was stayed for reasons to be subsequently pronounced which are stated hereunder:

(3.) After the appearance was entered into on behalf of fourth defendants on 29/08/1975 and on behalf of the second defendants on 27/11/1975 notice of motion was taken out by the learned advocate of 1st and fourth defendants for stay of the suit and proceedings under sec. 3 of the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Amendment Act 1973 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as Foreign Awards Act) on the ground that there was an arbitral clause in the charted party contract entered into between the 1st plaintiff and the first defendants hereto. On behalf of the first plaintiff objections to the notice of motion were raised in the reply affidavit of one Shri J.M.L. Anto Assistant Director (Food) and District Manager of the second plaintiffs contending inter alia that the arbitral clause in the chartered party contract provided for a reference of dispute to arbitration in a foreign country is not binding upon the Union of India and in any case this Court should refuse to exercise its discretion having regard to the nature of the claim as well of the defence and the over all balance of convenience which inter alia included the convenience of the witnesses who are of within the jurisdiction of this Court and the entire evidence of loss is in the records and proceedings at the port of Bhavnagar and also having regard to the fact of acute hardship of foreign exchange which would not in all probability be granted for carrying the witnesses from India to London.