IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 Arb.A.No. 5 of 2010(A) ---------------------- ( ORDER IN I.A.NO.7/2010 IN ARB.O.P.NO.4/2010 OF IVTH ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM( SPECIAL COURT(CBI)ERNAKULAM) APPELLANT/PETITIONER -------------------- LAKSHMI HOSPITAL REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR PRADEEP WARRIER DIWAN'S ROAD, KOCHI - 682 016 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT --------------- THE FERTILIZERS & CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD(FACT) UDYOGAMANDAL REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR CAVEATOTR SMT.SMITHA GEORGE SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN FOR CAVEATOR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE, SENIOR ADVOCATE THIS ARBITRATION APPEALS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Arb.Appeal No.5 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the IVth Addl.District Judge, Ernakulam on an interlocutory application filed by the appellant for temporary injunction in an original petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. 2. The appellant has been, admittedly, conducting a hospital in the premises of the respondent company ever since May 2004. It is the case of the appellant that it is entitled to conduct the hospital for 15 years by virtue of Annexure A agreement. However, the respondent issued notice of termination directing the appellant to vacate the hospital premises. It was at that stage that the original petition was filed seeking appropriate reliefs under the Act. 3. In the said original petition, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure was filed with a prayer to pass an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondent from Arb.Appeal No.5/2010 2 evicting the appellant from the hospital premises and also from sub letting the same to any other person or institution to run the hospital until arbitration proceedings initiated by the appellant were over. 4. The court below after considering the rival contentions of the parties took the view that the Leave and Licence Agreement (Annexure A) executed between the appellant and the respondent did not contain any arbitration clause and therefore the provisions of the Act cannot be invoked. It was further held that the respondent was well within its powers to terminate the licence after issuing proper notice. The court below further held that premature termination of licence would not result in any hardship or inconvenience to the appellant in as much as such premature termination with due notice was contemplated under Annexture A agreement. What primarily weighed with the court below was that there was no arbitral clause in Annexture A agreement warranting interference of the court in the dispute between the parties, under the Act. 5. When this appeal came up for consideration, learned senior counsel on both sides were heard. Arb.Appeal No.5/2010 3 6. Sri.K.Ramakumar, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant had already approached the Govt. of India seeking its intervention in the matter since the appellant had made huge investments before the establishment of the hospital at the premises of the respondent company, which is a Public Sector Undertaking. As requested by learned senior counsel, the case was adjourned twice in order to see whether the appellant would succeed in getting orders in its favour from the Union Government. Ultimately, learned senior counsel submitted that the appellant is prepared to vacate the premises, subject of course, to the final decision of the Central Government. Accordingly, the appellant has filed an affidavit undertaking to vacate the hospital premises to the respondent within four months from today viz. April 15, 2010. The affidavit is taken on record. 7. Sri.A.M.Shaffique, learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that all admitted amounts, if any, due to the appellant will be paid by the respondent to the appellant before it vacates the premises. Learned senior counsel further submits that it goes without saying that any policy decision that may be taken by the Arb.Appeal No.5/2010 4 Union Government in respect of the affairs of the company will be binding on the company since it is a public sector undertaking. 8. In view of the undertaking, it is ordered that the appellant shall vacate the premises as undertaken by it within four months from today, subject to orders that may be passed by the Union Government in the matter, as indicated above. The Appeal is closed in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. Arb.Appeal No.5/2010 5