THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.6472 OF 2006 ORDER: The petitioner-defendant filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the order dated 31.10.2006 in I.A.No.895 of 2005 in O.S.No.1241 of 2004 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, in dismissing the application filed under Section 8 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 {“the Act” for brevity}, seeking to stay all further proceedings in the suit and to refer the matter to the Arbitrator for arbitration. The facts, in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this revision, are that in the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent herein, he sought for return of the documents and also the consequential relief for issuance of clearance certificate from the petitioner’s Finance Company in favour of the plaintiff. The entire such claim is based upon the fact that the amounts due are already paid and necessarily, the documents have to be returned and clearance certificate has to be issued. Even though reference was made to clause 15 of the Hire Purchase Agreement, which clarifies that “all disputes, differences and/or claims arising out of the Hire Purchase Agreement during its subsistence or thereafter shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the matter shall be referred to the sole arbitrator nominated by the petitioner and the Award given by such arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties to the agreement”, the Court below did not find favour with the request of the petitioner and taking into account the subsequent developments on the premise that there is settlement and payment was made, dismissed the application. Hence, the revision. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent pointed out that in fact, subsequently, arbitration was referred to and the award was allowed ex parte against which an appeal is pending. Having considered the submissions made and on perusal of the material available on record, especially taking into account the fact that the parties have already opted for arbitration and that the award appears to have passed ex parte and on that ground, the appeal is pending, it is needless to reiterate that it is always open for both the parties to set forth their claims, objections and counter claims, which will form part of the arbitration. Necessarily, it requires to be set aside for the purpose of giving opportunity to both the sides, so that all the issues and claims, whatever may arise, vice versa have to be gone into and appropriate award has to be passed. Subject to the above directions and also the approach necessarily to be followed, there is no need to go into the present proceedings. That apart, it is made clear that since arbitration is already opted, the present suit filed in O.S.No.1241of 2004 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, no longer subsists nor any cause survives. Hence, in exercise of powers under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the said suit is dismissed as withdrawn. Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition is disposed of in terms thereof. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) 26th August 2010 RRB