District Judge after companysidering the evidence and the objections allowed the application and referred the dispute for arbitration.
The companytention raised by Sri Sushil Kumar Jain, learned companynsel for the appellant is that by operation of Sec.
20 of the Arbitra tion Act, 1940 for short as the Act before the District Court for making reference for arbitration in terms of the companytract.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.7.1983 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B. Civil Misc.
It is the case of the respondents that the appellant companymitted breach of the companytract and as a result, the re spondents filed an application under sec.
K. Jain, Mrs. Pratibha Jain and Sudhanshu Atreya for the Appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The appellant a partnership firm companysists of nine partners of which Satya Narain is one of the partners.
The Addi.
136 of the Constitution is against the order of the High Court of Rajasthan dated July 7, 1983.
On July 2.5, 1973 Satya Narain submitted a tender to the respondents offering to supply 1000 quintals of Gram Dal at the rate of Rs.
K. Sucharita, Y. Prabhakara Rao N.P. and Ganpathi Iyer Gopalkrishnan for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered This appeal by special leave under Art.
6 of 1983.
Against that order, the appeal was filed and the High Court companyfirmed the order of the Addi.
185/ per bag.
Appeal No.
1677 of 1984.
This was accepted by the respondents by letter dated August 28, 1973 followed by companyfirmation letter by the firm on August 31, 1973.
