C.R. No. 914 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 914 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 9.2.2011 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. ......Petitioner Versus Charanjit Singh .......Respondents **** CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present : Mr. Pravindra Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-Charanjit Singh had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from collecting/recovering installments from the month of June, 2009 onwards forcibly and further by adopting coercive methods or by taking into custody the trailer belonging to the plaintiff bearing RC No. RJ-13G-0677 except in due course of law. During the pendency of the suit, an application was filed by the petitioner praying for dismissal of the suit by virtue of arbitration clause. Vide the impugned order dated 10.8.2010, the said application was dismissed. Hence, the present petition by the defendant. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. Plaintiff had purchased a trailer after taking loan from the defendant. Plaintiff deposited the installments up to May 2009, but C.R. No. 914 of 2011 (O&M) 2 thereafter plaintiff defaulted. The plaintiff had filed the suit that the defendant should not recover the installments from him without following due process of law. The learned trial Court has held that the dispute involved between the parties did not call for intervention of the arbitrator. The plaintiff was asking the defendant to return back the trailer so that he could repay the installments. The dispute is not qua the terms of the agreement which would require that the same be referred for arbitration. In these circumstances, the application was rightly dismissed by the trial court. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE February 9, 2011 Anand