Page No.# 3/9 arose between the parties, and accordingly, the matter was referred to an Arbitral Tribunal and the Tribunal adjudicated the disputes vide Arbitral Award dated 15.02.2006, wherein, all claims and counterclaims have been adjudicated. Thereafter, the respondent instituted Money Suit being No.95/2019, for recovery of sum of Rs.8,98,67,000/-(Rupees Eight Crore Ninety-Eight Lakhs Sixty-Seven Thousand) only, which was paid towards the supply of Electro and Mechanical (here in after E & M) Equipment, which was included in the commissioning and constructing the Kush Mini-Hydel Project. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an Application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and 11(d) read with Order II Rule 2 and Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking rejection of the Money Suit No.95/2019. But, the learned Court below, after hearing the parties, at length, dismissed the petition vide impugned order dated 20.12.2021, by holding that from the reading of the plaint, there is nothing to suggest that the same is barred by the principles of resjudicata and that admittedly, the issue of refund of cost of the E & M equipments had not been raised, heard and finally decided by the Arbitral Tribunal. It is further held that the issue of res-judicata cannot be decided merely by looking into the averment in the plaint while the pleading in Arbitral Tribunal has not been produced before the court.”
