( 1 ) FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETN. NO.2654/2008 Union of India -vs- N. R. Harne. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr.Agrawal, Adv. for petitioner. Mrs.Deshpande, Adv. for respondent. CORAM : A. B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATE : 16/09/2008 Heard. This petition is against an order referring the dispute to the arbitrator under Sec.8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. It is undisputed that upon the death of workman claim for compensation, interest and penalty was made before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and in that proceeding award was made by the Commissioner, making it joint and several. In other words, even the Contractor has been held liable to pay compensation along with the principal employer by the Commissioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the entire amount of compensation and penalty, as ordered by the Commissioner, was deposited before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and has been withdrawn by the claimant. Learned counsel further states that against that award petitioner has ( 2 ) preferred first appeal No.426/2004 before this Court, which has been admitted and is pending for final hearing. In that first appeal the respondent/contractor is also a party. The suit in question came to be filed for recovery of the entire amount of compensation and penalty from the Contractor as according to the petitioner, the liability could not be joint and several, but could be only of the contractor. It is thus, clear that the suit in question is nothing but duplication of the proceedings for the same relief. At any rate, in the above factual background since the petitioner can get the same relief in the pending first appeal, which is claimed in the suit in question, there is no need for me to interfere with the impugned order referring the matter to arbitration under Sec.8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The petition is, therefore, not entertained, but liberty is reserved in favour of petitioner to make all such claims in pending first appeal No.426/2004. Petition rejected. No costs. JUDGE gsk