THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1357 OF 2011 Dated:21.04.2011 Between: Shaik Hasanu Sab .. Petitioner And The Manager, Induslnd Bank Limited, (Vehicle Finance Division), 20-108, Naidu Buildings, Chittoor Town and District .. Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1357 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner instituted O.S.No.58 of 2009 for permanent injunction not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property bearing No.KA-40-3875 as per Clause (5) of the Hire Purchase Agreement (HPA). Be it noted, the petitioner purchased a truck/lorry availing finance/loan from the respondent bank alleging that the respondent is invoking Clause (5) of the HPA and trying to seize the vehicle. He moved an application being I.A.No.363 of 2009 for two prayers: first to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and second to decide the issue of jurisdiction under Order XIV Rule 2(2) of CPC in view of Section 12(a) under the Arbitration Clause in the HPA. The application was partly allowed by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Punganur, referring the matter to an arbitrator, but declined to reject the plaint. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. The counsel for the petitioner submits that pending consideration of the interlocutory application filed by the respondent, the petitioner’s application being I.A.No.329 of 2009 for ad interim injunction was allowed and, therefore, while referring the matter to the arbitrator the Court below ought to have continued the ad interim injunction. There is no dispute that as per the HPA, all disputes have to be resolved to the arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act, for brevity). When the Act applies, the remedy of the petitioner/plaintiff is to seek interlocutory orders under Section 9 of the Act by moving to the District Court. The Senior Civil Judge would get the jurisdiction to grant ad interim injunction in exercise of supplementary powers only when such Court has jurisdiction. By reason of the Act, if the power is ousted the Court cannot pass an order to continue injunction even if such an order was passed initially before the defendant/respondent entered appearance. The Civil Revision Petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 21.04.2011 KH