DIRECTOR GENERAL (INVESTIGATION AND REGISTRATION) vs HOECHEST MARION RUSSEL LTD.

THE complainant had filed a complaint against the respondents alleging that respondent No. 2 had stopped supply to the complainant on the instructions of respondent No. 1. THE matter was referred to the Director General (Investigation and Registration). THE respondents have filed reply dated 28.3.2001 justifying their action. THE parties executed a Distributors'' Agreement dated 22.7.1999 which is also filed along with the reply. THE points in the issue flow from the agreement. We may refer here to Clauses 10 and 11 of the agreement dealing with termination and settlement of disputes. This may be reproduced as below : "10. Termination of agreement Should we be found not to be acting in accordance with the above laid terms and conditions and should we fail to maintain and submit the records required under Clause 8, you will be entitled to terminate the distributorship/stockistship agree-ment immediately and without any obligation toward us.

All disputes arising out of this agreement shall, failing arbitration, be litigated in Courts having jurisdiction in Greater Bombay. In the event of any disputes arising out of or in relation to this agreement other than a dispute under Clause 10, the same shall be decided in Bombay by arbitration in accordance with provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act, X of 1940 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force."

IN view of the settled position that when the parties have willingly executed an agreement which prescribes mode of settlement of disputes, it will not be open for the Forum to start parallel proceedings in respect of the same cause of action. We do not, therefore, find any ground to entertain this complaint. The same is, therefore, dismissed. Complaint dismissed.