| Fiji Islands - Prasad v Goundar - Pacific Law Materials |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
(AT SUVA)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 205 OF 1996S
BETWEEN:
RAJENDRA PRASAD
Plaintiff
AND:
KRISHNA SAMI GOUNDAR
Defendant
S.K. Ram for the Plaintiff
R. Naidu for the Defendant
DECISION
There are two applications for the Court. The first is for summary judgment brought under the provisions of RHC 014 R1 and filed on
12 July 1996. The second is an application brought pursuant to the provisions of Section 5 of the Arbitration Act (Cap. 38) filed on 13 August 1996.
Both Counsel have filed comprehensive and helpful written submissions.
Considering all the papers before me I am satisfied that the sum owed arises from a varied building contract which contains an arbitration
clause. The first question therefore is whether the respondent's cross application dated 13 August should be granted. If this application
is successful then the whole Action would be referred to arbitration unless the sum claimed could somehow be distinguished from the
balance in dispute.
Mr. Ram advanced a strong argument to show that whatever else might be in dispute the $28,000 really could not be argued against.
After consideration however I do not think I can or should pick and choose between different aspects of the total dispute as pleaded
and neither should I assess the strength or weakness of the parties' cases.
In these circumstances I am satisfied that I should stay the proceedings in this Court under the provisions of Section 5 of the Arbitration Act. The application under Order 14 accordingly does not fall to be considered.
M.D. Scott
JUDGE
22 January 1997
Hbc205d.96s
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJHC/1997/9.html
