JUDGMENT
K. Ramamoorthy, J.
(1) The plaintiff Banwari Lal Radhe Mohan had filed this suit against the three defendants The Punjab State Co-op. Supply & Marketing Federation Ltd. herein called the contesting defendant, second defendant is State Trading Corporation of India, third defendant a person in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The suit is for the recovery of Rs. 53,19,104.66 against all the defendants. Purposely defendants 2 and 3 have been added as parties while the allegations in the plaint would show the relief is against the contesting defendant alone.
(2) In the agreement between the parties, which was for the purpose of export of Basmati Rice outside India there is arbitration clause. The plaintiff in December 1981 invoking the arbitration clause against the contesting defendant filed Suit No. 1392A/81 under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. This Court by order dated 30.3.1982 appointed the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Punjab, as the Sole Arbitrator. On 24.5.1982 the claimant filed his claim statement before the Sole Arbitrator and when the proceedings were being adjourned from time to time by the Sole Arbitrator, on 16.10.1984 the plaint in the present case was presented, as stated above for the recovery of money. In November 1984 the plaintiff withdrew OMP.88/82, which was filed making personal allegations against the Sole Arbitrator.
(3) On 24.1.1985 the contesting defendant filed I.A.524/85 under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act for the stay of the suit. On 29.4.1985 reply to the I.A. was filed by the plaintiff. On 13.9.1985 contesting defendant filed the rejoinder to the reply. In the suit the second defendant State Trading Corporation was set ex parte and there was an application I.A.155/86 by the second defendant to set aside the ex parte order and that was subsequently allowed and that was why all the matters were being adjourned from time to time. On 17.7.1985 notice was ordered in I.A. 524/85 by Luthra.J. On 20.8.1985 Deputy Registrar directed the matter to be posted before Court as Short Matter on 3.9.1985 but the matter was posted on 12.9.1985. On 12.9.1985 adjourned it was adjourned to 19.9.1985. On 19.9.1985 matter was adjourned to 15.11.1985. On 15.11.1985 on joint request adjourned to 28.11.1985. On 28.11.1985 adjourned to 25.2.1986. In the suit, as stated above, Goel J. set the second defendant ex parte and I.A.155/86 was filed by the second defendant to set aside the ex parte order dated 25.2.1986. I.A. 155/86 was allowed by this Court. I.A.524/85 was adjourned to 1.5.1986 for framing of issues. On 1.5.1986the learned Judge framed the issues and passed the following order :- “THE application be listed for directions regarding the mode in which the evidence should be allowed to be adduced by the plaintiff and defendant No. I in Section 34 application be listed on 13.5.1986.”
(4) The learned Judge also directed the parties to appear before Joint Registrar for admission and denial. The learned Judge also directed the suit to be listed for framing of issues between plaintiff and second defendant on 8.8.1986. On 7.7.1986 Joint Registrar was on leave and the matter was adjourned to 30.7.1986. On 30.7.1986 the case was fixed for hearing before Court. On 8.8.1986 the matter was further adjourned.
(5) The contesting defendant filed OMP.96/86 for extension of time for the Arbitrator to pass the award under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act.
(6) I have gone through the allegations in the plaint. The averments in I.A. 524/ 85 and OMP.96/86.
(7) In view of the above, I propose that the matter should go before the Arbitrator. I do not want to say anything on the merits of the case.
(8) The plaintiff having instituted the Suit No. 1392A/87 and having obtained order in his favor and having filed his claim statement before the Arbitrator can not maintain this suit for the relief claimed by him. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Punjab was appointed as sole Arbitrator by this Court and whoever is holding the office can take up the arbitration and adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. By making defendants 2 and 3 as parties in the suit, just for the purpose of avoiding the arbitration, the plaintiff can not hope to prosecute this suit.
(9) In my view, the contesting defendant in the suit i.e. the petitioner in IA.524/ 85 has made out a case for stay under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I allow IA.524/85 and stay all proceedings in Suit No. 1901/84.
(10) OMP.96/86FOR extension of time, filed by the contesting defendant,is a also allowed and the time for passing the award by the Sole Arbitrator, namely the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, Punjab is extended by four months from the date the Registrar receives the order from this Court. This order will be communicated to the Arbitrator forthwith.
(11) Parties shall appear before the Sole Arbitrator, Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Punjab on 28.8.95 at 10.30 a.m. and fix it further programme in the arbitration proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs.