Ankur Filling Station v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited And Another

Order

1. In view of the decisions of this Court in Harbanslal Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 107 and E. Venkatakrishna v. Indian Oil Corpn. (2000) 7 SCC 764, let notice be issued.

2. However, we are of the opinion that the aforementioned decisions would require reconsideration by a larger Bench of this Court in the light of various other decisions of this Court and in particular, in Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Pinkcity Midway Petroleums (2003) 6 SCC 503, Sanjana M. Wig v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. (2005) 8 SCC 242 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Manubhai Dharmasinhbhai Gajera (2008) 10 SCC 404.

3. Prima facie, we are of the view that although in a given case the arbitrator may not be entitled to direct restoration of supply; by itself may not be a ground to entertain a writ application, particularly when the remedy of the petitioner in such an event may also lie by filing a civil suit. Therefore, in our opinion this matter should be considered by a larger Bench.

4. Let the matter be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. Any action taken by the respondents in the meanwhile shall abide by the result of the matter.

Court Masters