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 4, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

Vishal Earth Movers India Pvt Ltd vs Valecha Engineering Limited And Anr on 22 February, 2019

Author: G.S. Kulkarni

Bench: G.S. Kulkarni

                                            1                                  5-arbpl 73-19

psv
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                       ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.73 OF 2019

      Vishal Earth Movers India Pvt. Ltd.            ..Petitioner
                   Vs.
      M/s.Valecha Engineering Ltd. & Anr.            ..Respondents
                                         -----

      Mr.Pradeep Thorat for Petitioner.
      Ms.Priya Rao i/b. N.K. Sharma & Partners for Respondent No.2.
                                        -----

                                     CORAM :    G.S. KULKARNI, J.

                                     DATE   :   22nd FEBRUARY, 2019

      P.C.:

              This is a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and

      Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the ACA") whereby the petitioner has

      prayed for interim reliefs pending the arbitral proceedings.



      2.      The case of the petitioner is that the disputes and differences have

      arisen between the petitioner and the respondents under a sub-contract

      agreement dated 3 December 2018 which according to the petitioner

      was abruptly terminated on 16 January 2019. It is the petitioner's case

      that the performance guarantee of Rs.1 Crore was also furnished by the

      petitioner under clause 20 of the said agreement.                  In the above

      circumstances, the petitioner has prayed for the following interim

      reliefs:-



      ::: Uploaded on - 25/02/2019                   ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2019 02:07:45 :::
                                        2                                    5-arbpl 73-19

         "a.    That pending the hearing and conclusion of the
         Arbitration proceedings between the Petitioner and the
         Respondents, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the
         operation, implementation and execution of the letter of
         Termination dated 16th January, 2019 and bearing Reference
         No. VEL/UP/RC/880413/HO/77.
         b.     That pending the hearing and conclusion of the
         Arbitration proceedings, the Respondents, their agents,
         servants and persons claiming through him be temporarily
         restrained by an Order of Injunction of this Hon'ble Court
         from creating any third party interests and/or parting with or
         disturbing the equipment, machinery and other resources
         mobilized by the Petitioner for the said Work."


3.      Considering the nature of the disputes when this petition was

taken up for hearing on 14 February 2019, learned Counsel for the

parties agreed that the parties can attempt to resolve the disputes, and

in that event, Consent Terms can be placed on record.                      It was so

recorded by the Court in the order dated 14 February 2019. Thereafter

on 15 February 2019, the Court passed the following order:-

         "1.    By consent of the parties, stand over to 22 February
         2019, to enable the parties to amicably settle the disputes."


4.      Today learned Counsel for the parties inform that an amicable

settlement of the disputes is not possible.



5.      On the above background, this petition was taken up for hearing.

After this petition was heard for some time, learned Counsel for the

parties are agreeable that the disputes and differences between the

parties as arisen under the sub-contract agreement dated 3 December




::: Uploaded on - 25/02/2019                      ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2019 02:07:45 :::
                                     3                                   5-arbpl 73-19

2018 can be referred for adjudication by appointing a sole arbitrator.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submits that the present petition

under Section 9 of the ACA can also be converted into an application

under Section 17 of the ACA to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal.

The approach on the part of the parties is a fair approach. Accordingly,

the petition need not be kept pending for further adjudication, it is

required to be disposed of. Hence, the following order:-

                                  ORDER

(i) Mr.Pankaj Kowli, Advocate of this Court, is appointed as a prospective sole Arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes and differences between the parties under the sub-contract agreement dated 3 December 2018.

(ii) The learned sole prospective arbitrator, fifteen days before entering the arbitration reference, shall forward a statement of disclosure as per the requirement of Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court, to be placed on record of this petition with a copy to be forwarded to both the parties;

(iii) This arbitration petition filed under Section 9 of the ACA is permitted to be converted into an application under Section 17 of the ACA to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal;

(iv) All contentions of the parties on merits of the disputes as also on ::: Uploaded on - 25/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2019 02:07:45 ::: 4 5-arbpl 73-19 the Section 17 application are expressly kept open;

(v) At the first instance, the parties shall appear before the prospective arbitrator within 10 days from today on a date which may be mutually fixed by the prospective sole arbitrator;

(vi) The petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

(vii) Office to forward a copy of this order to the learned prospective Arbitrator on the following address:

address: 31, Kamer Building, (Opposite Vardhaman Chamber), Cawasjee Patel Street, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001. Contact No. 9869218897 / 9167024439
6. At this stage, learned Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the respondents have no objection for the petitioner demobilizing its machinery on the site.

[G.S. KULKARNI, J.] ::: Uploaded on - 25/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2019 02:07:45 :::