IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.5169 of 2010
1. M/S RAKESH EATABLES & GENERAL PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, B-4,
INDUSTRIAL AREA, HAJIPUR, DISTT.- VAISHALI THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR
SURESH PRASAD CHOUDHARY, S/O LATE BINDA PRASAD CHOUDHARY, R/O C-503,
KAUSHALYA ESTATE, BANDAR BAGICHA, P.S. KOTWALI, TOWN & DISTT.- PATNA
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
INDUSTRIES, GOVT. OF BIHAR, VIKAS BHAWAN, PATNA
2. THE BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST
GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA
4. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, UDYOG BHAWAN, EAST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA
5. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), BIHAR INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL OFFICE, BELA, MUZAFFARPUR
-----------
3. 04.04.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Counsel for the BIADA.
The controversy emerging in the present writ application is with
regard to the meaning and interpretation of the words “maintenance
charges” in the agreement dated 23.1.2008 executed between the
parties.
Both sides appear to be having their own interpretation which
the Court does not consider necessary to take note of as that is a
matter to be determined by the appropriate authority.
Clause 9 of the agreement contains an arbitration clause. It
needs no reiteration and the Counsel for the parties find it difficult to
persuade the Court otherwise that when there is an arbitration clause
the writ court shall be loath to interfere. Nothing has been placed or
demonstrated that the present case comes within the exception clause
where notwithstanding the arbitration clause the writ court may still
interfere in the matter.
Counsel for the parties are agreed that on presentation of a
copy of this order before the Managing Director the matter shall be
referred by him for arbitration forthwith so that it may be ultimately
concluded and Award made within a maximum period of two months
from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this before the
Managing Director provided the parties themselves cooperate.
It is apparent that Clause 9 itself visualizes adequate opportunity
to both sides to present their stand before the arbitrator so that it may
take a reasoned and considered decision.
The writ application stands disposed.
Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)