1 wp6030.11.sxw ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6030 OF 2011 Sharadchandra Shripal Alase ....Petitioner. Vs. Deshbhakata Ratnapanna Kumbhar Panchanganga Co-op. Sugar Factory Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Uday Warunjikar for the Petitioner. Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni i/by Mr. A.A. Desai for Respondent No.1. CORAM :- D.K DESHMUKH AND ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE :- 19 DECEMBER, 2011. P.C. :- By this Petition, the Petitioner challenges an award made under Section 84 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002. An objection that this Court should not entertain this Petition because alternate remedy by filing a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Arbitration Act) is available to the Petitioner is raised by the Respondents. 2 wp6030.11.sxw ssm 2 In reply, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that remedy of filing a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act against the award is not available to the Petitioner. In our opinion, the objection appears to be well founded considering the provisions of Sub-Section (5) of Section 84 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 which makes the provisions of the Arbitration Act applicable to all arbitrations under the Act. Sub-Section (4) of Section 2 of the Arbitration Act also makes the provisions of the Arbitration Act except provisions of Sub-Section (1) of Section 40, Sections 41 and 43 applicable to all statutory arbitrations. Thus, against an award made under Section 84 of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, remedy of filing a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act in a Court is available to the Petitioner. The settled law is that when alternate remedy is available by way of Petition or Appeal to Court, Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the same order or award is not entertained as a rule. 3 It is, in our opinion, therefore, as the Petitioner has remedy of filing a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act challenging the award available to him, it will not be appropriate to entertain this Petition. The similar view has been taken by one of us Mr. Justice 3 wp6030.11.sxw ssm Anoop V. Mohta by his Judgment in the case of Satish D. Chaudhary Vs. NKGBS Co-operative Bank Ltd. 1 4 The Petition is, therefore, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 A request was made on behalf of the Petitioner that the Court in which a Petition under Section 34 is to be filed should be asked to decide that Petition at an early date. Considering that, the Petition is yet to be filed, in our opinion, making of such a direction would not be prudent. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) 1 2011(3) Mh.L.J. 451