Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

Supreme Mega Constructions Llp vs Nitin Pramod Samel And 3 Ors on 3 December, 2018

Author: G.S.Kulkarni

Bench: G.S.Kulkarni

RNG                                         1/4                       18-kamdar.sr.cnsel

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                    COMM. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.48 of 2016

      Supreme Mega Constructions LLP                   .... Applicant
                 vs
      Nitin Pramod Samel & ors                         .....     Respondents
                             __________

      Mr.S.U.Kamdar Sr.Counsel with Mr.Chirag Kamdar
      Ms.Tanvi Shah I.b M/s Wadia Ghandy & Co for Applicant
      Mr.S.M.Shettigar with Mr.Ram Mohite for Respondent
      nos 1 to 4.

                                           Coram :      G.S.KULKARNI, J
                                           Date :       03 DECEMBER 2018
      P.C

                        Heard Mr.Kamdar learned senior counsel for the applicant

      and Mr.Shettigar for respondents .



      2.                By this application under section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and

      Conciliation Act (for short 'the said Act')              the applicant is seeking

      appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes which have

      arisen between the parties under the MOU dated 23.12.2010 (Exhibit B.).



      3.                 Learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary

      objection that the said document is not adequately stamped. His

      contention is that before the Court proceeds to adjudicate this application



            ::: Uploaded on - 13/12/2018                       ::: Downloaded on - 28/12/2018 23:16:17 :::
 RNG                                       2/4                   18-kamdar.sr.cnsel

      and appoint an arbitrator as per law as laid down in SMS Estates Private

      Limited vs Chandmari Tea Company Private Limited (2011) 14

      Supreme Court Cases 66, the document needs to be adequately stamped.



      4.                Mr.Kamdar learned senior counsel for the applicant would

      not agree with the learned counsel for the respondents.                 Mr.Kamdar

      referring to Article 25 Explanation 1 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act,

      submits that the stamp duty on the document of the nature as it stands, is

      not payable. Mr.Kamdar in support of his submission has referred to a

      decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Balwant Gir Ganpatgir

      Giri vs Manasi Construction and Developers (2006) (5) Mh.L.J. 306.

      It is submitted that the Court is required to form a prima facie opinion

      under section 33 of the Act before impounding a document.



      5.                Learned counsel for the respondent however, would dispute

      the contention as urged by Mr.Kamdar to contend that what will be

      applicable are not the provisions of Article 25 but the provisions of Article

      5 sub-article (gj).



      6.                 Admittedly, the document in question is a MOU. It sets out



           ::: Uploaded on - 13/12/2018                  ::: Downloaded on - 28/12/2018 23:16:17 :::
 RNG                                        3/4                   18-kamdar.sr.cnsel

      in different paragraphs describing the transactions which are under the

      heading         "Consideration",     "condition   precedent",         "completion",

      "representations and warranties", "dispute resolutions " etc.



      7.                Having considered the submissions advanced at the bar and

      the nature of the document it would be appropriate that the MOU dated

      23.12.2010 as entered between the parties is examined for the purpose of

      stamp duty. It prima facie appears that certain rights are created by virtue

      of this document and if that be so, then the document needs to be

      examined for the purpose of payment of stamp duty.



      8.               Hence the following order:-



                                           ORDER

(i) The applicants are directed to deposit with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court the MOU dated 23.12.2010 within a period of two weeks from today.

(ii) The Prothonotary and Senior Master shall forward the document to the Collector of Stamps for examination of the document and ascertainment of stamp duty if it so becomes payable.

::: Uploaded on - 13/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 28/12/2018 23:16:17 :::
 RNG                                          4/4                   18-kamdar.sr.cnsel

              (iii)            In case the Collector of Stamps is of the opinion that

stamp duty is payable as per provisions of Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 then in that case the Collector of Stamps shall impound the document and direct the party to pay the necessary stamp duty as determined by the Collector of Stamps.

(iv) Needless to observe that the Collector of Stamps shall hear the parties before passing any final order ascertaining the stamp duty.

(v) The aforesaid exercise be undertaken by the Collector of Stamps as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of four weeks from today.

9. Awaiting orders that would be passed by the Collector of Stamps, hearing of this application would be required to be adjourned.

Accordingly, it is adjourned to 7.1.2019.

(G.S.KULKARNI, J) ::: Uploaded on - 13/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 28/12/2018 23:16:17 :::