Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1944 AR NO. 69 OF 2020 PETITIONER: JOJO JOSE AGED 47 YEARS S/O. JOSE SAMUEL, PROPRIETOR Y OF JOSE CASHEW FACTORY, ANAYADI, ANAYADI P.O. KOLLAM, KERALA 690 561. B.N.SHIVSANKAR SMT.ARCHANA HARIDAS K. RESPONDENT: ANIL KUMAR S/O. KARUNAKARAM, PROPRIETOR AMBALAKKARA CASHEW, NELLIKUNNAM P.O. KOTTARAKARA, 691 5320. SRI.SIDHARTH A.MENON SHRI.VASIL T.K. SRI.V.AJAKUMAR THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.08.2022, ALONG WITH AR.70/2020, 64/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1944 AR NO. 70 OF 2020 PETITIONERS: 1 SAMUEL JOSE(DIED) AGED 76 YEARS S/O. SAMUEL, PROPRIETOR OF THANKAM CASHEW FACTORY, ANAYADI P.O., KOLLAM, KERALA,PIN-690 561 2 THANKAMMA THOMAS AGED 70 YEARS W/O.JOSE SAMUEL, JOSE BHAVAN, SHOORANAD, ANAYADI.P.O, KOLLAM 3 JOHNSON JOSE AGED 48 YEARS S/O.JOSE SAMUEL, PAZHOOR HOUSE, SHOORANAD, ANAYADI.P.O, KOLLAM. 4 JAISON JOSE AGED 43 YEARS /O.JOSE SAMUEL, JOSE BHAVAN, SHOORANAD, ANAYADI.P.O, KOLLAM. 5 JOJO JOSE AGED 47 YEARS S/O JOSE SAMUEL, GRACE VILLA, SHOORANAD, ANAYADI P.O, KOLLAM (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED SOLE PETITIONER
ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL PETITIONERS 2 TO 5 AS PER ORDER
DATED 11/07/2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN AR 70/2020) B.N.SHIVSANKAR TINU T.JOSEPH ARCHANA HARIDAS K. RESPONDENT/S: ANIL KUMAR S/O. KARUNAKARAN, PROPRIETOR AMBALAKKARA CASHEW, NELLIKUNNAM P.O., KOTTARAKARA, PIN-691 520 SRI.SIDHARTH A.MENON SHRI.VASIL T.K. SRI.V.AJAKUMAR THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.08.2022, ALONG WITH AR.69/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1944 AR NO. 64 OF 2020 PETITIONER: JOHNSON JOSE AGED 47 YEARS S/O. JOSE SAMUEL, PROPRIETOR OF GLORY CHASEW, SOORANADU NORTH, NADUVILEMURY, ANAYADAY P.O., KOLLAM, KERALA,PIN- B.N.SHIVSANKAR SMT.ARCHANA HARIDAS K. RESPONDENT: ANIL KUMAR S/O. KARUNAKARAN, PROPRIETOR AMBALAKKARA CASHEW, NELLIKUNNAM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, PIN-691 520 SRI.SIDHARTH A.MENON SHRI.VASIL T.K. SRI.V.AJAKUMAR THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.08.2022, ALONG WITH AR.69/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Sathish Ninan, J.
============================== A.R.Nos.64, 69 & 70 of 2020 ========================== Dated this the 11tH day of August, 2022
ORDER
Annexure A1 and A2 agreements were entered into between the petitioner and the respondent where under the respondent agreed to sell cashew to the petitioner. Disputes have arisen between the parties, alleging non-supply of goods. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking appointment of Arbitrator relying on the arbitration clause in the agreement. The clause reads thus: “BY RBS CERTIFICATE IS FINAL.ARBITRATION CENTRE IN KOLLAM DISTRICT ONLY”.
2. Heard Sri.B.N.Shiv Shanker the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. V.Ajakumar the learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The contention of the respondent is that, the
arbitration clause deals only with a dispute on the quality of goods supplied and not a dispute on quantity or on alleged non-supply. The “RBS certificate” referred to in the clause deals with quality of goods. Therefore, the claim in the present case being not of quality but a case of non-supply of the goods, the said clause does not apply at all, it is contended. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent on the very same lines.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner expresses the willingness of the petitioner to approach approach the civil court for realization of claim amount.
5. It is not is dispute that there is an
acknowledgment of liability under Annexure A5 and that in the light of Annexure A5 the claim is, a live claim and is not barred by limitation. In the light of the above, relegating the parties to their remedy before the Civil Court, the Arbitration Requests are closed. Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE rsr APPENDIX OF AR 70/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE-1 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE CONTRACT DATED 12.05.2017 ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE AGREEMENT DATED 10.08.2017 ANNEXURE-3 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS ANNEXURE-4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE SENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 18.11.2019 ANNEXURE-5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 28.11.2019 APPENDIX OF AR 64/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE-1 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE CONTRACT DATED 12.05.2017 ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE AGREEMENT DATED 10.08.2017 ANNEXURE-3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT ANNEXURE-4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE SENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 18.11.2019 ANNEXURE-5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 28.1.2019 APPENDIX OF AR 69/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE CONTRACT DATED ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE HIGH SEA SALE AGREEMENT DATED 10/08/2017. ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT. ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE SENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 18/11/2019. ANNEXURE 5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 28/11/2019.