IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 2242 OF 1989 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Gulf India Travel Service & ors. ... Defendants. R.M.Vasudev for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 3714 OF 1989 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Mrs.Rita V. Gosalia. ... Defendant Viral Shukla i/b. Shukla & Asso. for plff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 3869 OF 1989 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Subra Tandon. ... Defendant S.I.Shah & S.I.Shah & Co. for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 1900 OF 1990 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Dr.Vishnu Kakkar. ... Defendant Ms.Krupa Shirke i/b. Gordhandas & Fozdar for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 2310 OF 1990 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. NEK Engineering & Construction(I) Ltd... Defendant Ms.Krupa Shirke i/b. Gordhandas & Fozdar for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 3125 OF 1990 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Mrs.Poonam Shawhney. ... Defendant J.R.Thakkar for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 3349 OF 1990 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Unique Pharmaceuticals Labortories Pvt.Ltd. ... Defendant Ms.Krupa Shirke i/b. Gordhandas & Fozdar for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 35 OF 1991 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Mrs.Manjula D. Shah. ... Defendant J.R.Thakkar for the plaintiff. None for the defendant. WITH SUIT NO. 2262 OF 1993 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Gosar and Shah & others. ... Defendants J.R.Thakkar for the plaintiff. None for the defendants. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 30th January 2008. DATED: 30th January 2008. DATED: 30th January 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff. . Perused plaint. 2. The present suits have been filed by the plaintiff- Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. for recovery of amount due and payable by the defendants under different telephone bills. The defendants failed to pay the amount so demanded by the plaintiff as per the said telephone bills, as the defendants contested the demand being excessive one. As the defendants have failed to pay the amount, the plaintiff had no option but to institute the present suits for recovery of the amount under the suit bills. Nobody is appearing for the defendants in spite of service. Even if defendants are absent, disputes need to be adjudicated upon. 3. Having regard to the mandate of section 7B of the Act, as expounded by the Apex Court in the case of Telecom District Manager, Goa & Ors. v. V.S.Dempo & Telecom District Manager, Goa & Ors. v. V.S.Dempo & Telecom District Manager, Goa & Ors. v. V.S.Dempo & Co. & Ors Co. & Ors Co. & Ors. reported in AIR 1996 SC 1545, all the matters deserve to be referred to arbitration. The reference to arbitration is for determination of disputes under section 7B of the Indian Telegraphs Act ("Act" for short), which is a statutory remedy. 4. The Central Government shall notify the arbitrator before whom the present dispute will be tried and decided in arbitration. The plaintiffs to intimate competent authority of the Central Government to take immediate steps to notify the arbitrator in terms of section 7B of the Act. Such notification shall be issued within eight weeks from today. 5. The arbitrator so appointed shall conclude the arbitration proceedings as expeditiously as possible and in any case, not later than six months from the date he enters upon arbitration or the parties are expected to make first appearances before him, whichever is earlier, following principles of natural justice. 6. It is made clear that all the issues raised in the present suits at the instance of either side shall be considered on merits in accordance with law in the arbitration proceedings. 7. Needless to mention that the Arbitrator would also be entitled to adjudicate upon counter-claim, if any. The parties shall also be at liberty to file their rival pleadings, if already not filed. 8. All suits are disposed of in the above terms. Refund as per rules. 9. The learned counsel for the plaintiff assures that intimation will be given to the defendants, as well as the plaintiff forthwith about the order passed today in these suits. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)