The Court referred a suit for recovery of unpaid telephone bills to arbitration under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, directing the plaintiff to move the Central Government for an arbitrator and allowing the suit to be withdrawn.
Suit allowed to be withdrawn; matter referred to arbitration; plaintiff entitled to refund of court fees.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 2933 OF 1994
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Bombay
...Plaintiff
vs.
Shri Agarwal Sandeep
...Defendant
Mrs.Jyoti R. Thakkar for the Plaintiff.
None for the Defendant.
CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J.
DATED : OCTOBER 16, 2009
P.C. :-
1Heard Counsel for the plaintiff. None for
the Defendant.
2Suit is instituted by Mahanagar Telephone
Nigam Limited for recovery of the amounts due and
payable by the defendant on account of unpaid
telephone bills.
2
3The dispute is in respect of correctness of
the amount claimed by the plaintiff under the bills
which are impugned in this suit which dispute is
squarely covered by the provisions of Section 7B of
the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The Apex Court after
taking into consideration the provisions of Section
7B of the said Act in the case of Telecom District
Manager, Goa vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. reported in AIR
1996 SC 1545 has observed that in view of the
amended provision of Section 7B read with Section
7E, the matter should be referred to arbitration. A
Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.
135/1990 and 145/1990 has also referred such cases
to arbitration. In similar other cases also, the
matters have been referred to arbitration.
4The MTNL, accordingly, therefore, shall
move the Central Government, expeditiously for the
appointment of arbitrator in view of provisions of
Section 7B of the said Act and judgment of the Apex
Court. Upon appointment of an Arbitrator, the matter
3
shall be referred for arbitration in terms of
Section 7B to the arbitrator. The Central Government
shall issue a notification appointing an arbitrator
within a period of eight weeks from today. The
Arbitratorshallconcludethearbitration
proceedings, expeditiously and in any case, within
six months from the date on which he enters upon the
arbitration or on the date on which the parties are
expected to appear before him. The questions raised
in the suit are kept open.
5. The suit, accordingly, is allowed to be
withdrawn in terms of reference to arbitration. The
plaintiff is entitled for refund of court fees in
accordance with Rules.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a suit for recovery of unpaid telephone bills covered by Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 can be referred to arbitration.
Whether the Court should allow withdrawal of the suit in terms of a reference to arbitration.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Telecom District Manager, Goa vs. V.S. Dempo & Co.Followed¶21
Telecom District Manager, Goa vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. reported in AIR 1996 SC 1545 · Who else cites this
Writ Petition Nos. 135/1990 and 145/1990Referred¶22
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Shri Agarwal Sandeep
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court