Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

A. Jana Vs. The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Chennai and Others

A. Jana vs The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Chennai and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Dec 19, 2016
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1186375

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P(MD)No. 22321 of 2016 & W.M.P(MD)No. 15995 of 2016
Subject
Arbitration

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Arbitration

Key legal issue
Arbitration

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A. Jana

Respondent

The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Chennai and Others

Excerpt

.....to direct the respondent to remove the seal put up at the toilet blocks at the 3rd respondent premises and permit the petitioner to continue the lease as per the agreement, dated 21.10.2015.) 1. this writ petition is filed challenging the order of the first respondent, dated 15.11.2016 terminating the contract with the petitioner in respect of maintaining the toilet at the third respondent/premises. 2. heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents and perused the materials placed before this court. 3. though the learned senior counsel vehemently contended that the impugned order of termination cannot be sustained on the reason that the same came to be passed with vague allegations, this court is not inclined to go into the merits of the contentions of the rival parties for the only reason that the agreement between the parties contains a clause for arbitration stipulating that in case of any dispute, the franchiser has to refer the dispute to an arbitrator in accordance with the provisions for the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 and that the parties agreed to abide by the decision of the arbitrator. it is also stated therein that the place of arbitrator shall be at chennai. this court has already taken a view in several decisions that invoking the jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the constitution of india for redressal of the grievance of the parties cannot be entertained, if the agreement between them contains the arbitration clause. 4. therefore without expressing any view on the merits of the contentions raised by both the parties, this writ petition is disposed of, only with a direction to the respondents to initiate an arbitration proceedings as contemplated under clause 27 of the agreement within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. if any arbitrator is so appointed, such arbitral proceedings shall be concluded within a.....

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent pertaining to its order bearing letter No.1214/H3/2015 dated 15.11.2016 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondent to remove the seal put up at the Toilet Blocks at the 3rd Respondent premises and permit the petitioner to continue the lease as per the agreement, dated 21.10.2015.)

1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order of the first respondent, dated 15.11.2016 terminating the contract with the Petitioner in respect of maintaining the toilet at the third respondent/premises.

2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents and perused the materials placed before this Court.

3. Though the learned Senior Counsel vehemently contended that the impugned order of termination cannot be sustained on the reason that the same came to be passed with vague allegations, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the contentions of the rival parties for the only reason that the agreement between the parties contains a clause for arbitration stipulating that in case of any dispute, the franchiser has to refer the dispute to an arbitrator in accordance with the provisions for the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and that the parties agreed to abide by the decision of the Arbitrator. It is also stated therein that the place of Arbitrator shall be at Chennai. This Court has already taken a view in several decisions that invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of the grievance of the parties cannot be entertained, if the agreement between them contains the arbitration clause.

4. Therefore without expressing any view on the merits of the contentions raised by both the parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of, only with a direction to the respondents to initiate an arbitration proceedings as contemplated under Clause 27 of the agreement within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any arbitrator is so appointed, such arbitral proceedings shall be concluded within a period of six weeks from the date of commencement of such arbitration. Since the nature of work allotted to the petitioner relates to maintaining the toilet, the respondents cannot close the toilet without putting it for public use. Accordingly, it is made clear that the respondents, while referring the matter to the arbitration, shall also ensure that the toilets are properly maintained and put into use for the public. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial