Bombay High Court
Shriram Transport Finance Company ... vs Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo And ... on 22 March, 2022
Author: G.S. Kulkarni
Bench: G.S. Kulkarni
Digitally
signed by
PRAJAKTA
PRAJAKTA SAGAR
SAGAR
VARTAK
VARTAK
Date:
2022.03.11
-1- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
17:41:55
+0530
Prajakta Vartak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20309 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.331 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18278 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.325 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.335 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.339 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18288 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
-2- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.333 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18293 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18300 OF 2021
Bharti Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20308 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20318 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20324 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
-3- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20330 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20332 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20336 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20338 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20339 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20341 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Bharti Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20313 OF 2021
WITH
-4- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3359 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18269 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18273 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.326 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18277 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18282 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18289 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
-5- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.338 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18292 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18295 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18296 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.329 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18304 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.334 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
-6- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18312 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.327 OF 2021
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo ..Petitioner
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20312 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3341 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20315 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3333 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20317 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3336 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20322 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3339 OF 2022
-7- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20323 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3346 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20326 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3337 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20327 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3338 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20329 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3360 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20331 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3376 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
-8- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20333 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3334 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20337 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3385 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20342 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3358 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20343 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3335 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20346 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.3340 OF 2022
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Jogindersingh Desrajsingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
-9- 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20314 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18281 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.337 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.332 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.330 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18294 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.354 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
- 10 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.336 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.18307 OF 2021
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Respondent
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20310 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20311 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20316 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20320 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20321 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
- 11 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20328 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
AND
ARBITRATION PETITION (L.) NO.20335 OF 2021
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. ..Petitioner
Vs.
Rounak Jogindersingh Magoo & Anr. ..Respondents
-----
Mr. Anoshak Daver with Ms. Sunitha Perumal, Ms. Savita Bharate, Ms.
Chitra Kawlekar i/b. Mr. Sachin Masurkar for Petitioners.
Mr. Gauraj Shah with Mr. Ashutosh Singh for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Ms. Kritika Sethi i/b. Aqui Law for Respondent No.3 (IOCL).
-----
CORAM : G.S. KULKARNI, J.
DATE : MARCH 07, 2022.
P.C.:
1. These are 33 proceedings filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, "the Act"). Also there are 14
applications filed under Section 11 of the Act as also there are 33
petitions filed under Section 14 read with Section 15 of the Act. All
these proceedings are heard together and disposed of by this common
order.
2. Disputes and differences have arisen between the parties under the
different loan cum hypothecation agreements, as entered between the
parties, the details of which are set out in each of the proceedings.
- 12 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
3. The case of the petitioner-Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. in
the Section 9 petitions is that the respondents, who have availed loan
under the loan agreements and as also having entered into the
hypothecation agreements, in respect of each of the vehicles, totaling to
33 vehicles, have defaulted in making payment of the installments. It is
the petitioner's contention that in terms of the loan agreement as also in
terms of the hypothecation agreements, the interim reliefs as prayed for
in the Section 9 petitions ought to be granted pending the arbitral
proceedings. The prayers as made in the Section 9 petition are similar.
Illustratively the prayers as made in one of the petitions need to be
noted which reads thus:-
"a) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration
proceedings or at any time after the making of the Arbitral
Award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Court Receiver,
High Court, Bombay be appointed as a Receiver Under Order
XL Rule 1 of C.P.C. in respect of the said Asset more
particularly described in Exhibit "G" to the Petition hereto,
with a direction to the Court Receiver to take physical
possession of the said Asset with /or without giving notice of
their visit to the Respondents and for that purpose, this
Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the concerned Police Station
to render Police Assistance for the purpose of taking possession
of the said Asset and hand it over to the Petitioner;
b) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration
proceedings or at any time after the making of the Arbitral
Award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court
Receiver be allowed to take forcible possession of the said
Asset with the help of police assistance by breaking open the
seals and/or locks of whatsoever nature or by whomsoever put
on the premises where the said Asset is lying.
c) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration
proceedings or at any time after the making of the Arbitral
Award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, this Hon'ble
Court be pleased to direct the Respondents to disclose the
location of the said Asset on oath to enable the Court Receiver
to take possession of the said Asset;
- 13 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration
proceedings or at any time after the making of the Arbitral
Award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Respondents
and their respective servants and agents be restrained by an
order of injunction of this Hon'ble Court in any manner from
parting with possession, creating third party rights, alienating
and/or encumbering with the hypothecated Asset as described
Exhibit G to the Petition;
e) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the arbitration
proceedings or at any time after the making of the Arbitral
Award but before it is enforced in accordance with Section 36
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Petitioner be
allowed to sale the said Hypothecated Assets at Exhibit "G" by
way of private treaty and give the credit of the amount
received from sale of those Asset to the Total Loan amount
outstanding and in that event the Court Receiver so appointed
be directed to hand over the Assets so possessed to the
Petitioner or buyer of the said Asset at Exhibit-G.
f) the Respondents their agent/s, servant/s and any third
person/s claiming through them be directed to disclose all
their immovable and immovable ownership assets and further
restrained by an order of injunction of this Hon'ble Court from
encumbering and/or transferring and/or disposing and/or
alienation and/or creating any third party rights and/or
interfering with the possession of the said assets and
properties."
4. Echoing the grievance of the petitioner which is common in all
these proceedings, it is submitted by Mr Daver, learned counsel for the
petitioner that the total amount due and payable by the respondents
along with the contractual interest as levied as on date is about Rs.15
Crores. This amount has been disputed on behalf of the respondents on
the ground of interest and penalty being levied by the petitioner.
5. Be that as it may, the Court had heard these proceedings from
time to time. Earlier the proceedings were adjourned to enable the
parties to discuss a settlement by way of interim arrangement till the
- 14 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
disputes are resolved by the arbitral tribunal. All efforts were made by
the parties however, the discussions could not be fruitful as there were
some differences on certain amounts.
6. In these circumstances, considering the clear terms of the loan
agreements as also the hypothecation agreements, Mr. Daver would
submit that interim reliefs be granted to the petitioner. He has relied on
several orders as passed by the different benches of this Court and more
particularly on the order dated 25 November, 2019 passed by this Court
(G. S. Patel, J.) in the case of Citi Bank N.A. versus Manjeet Singh Bagga
(Borrower) & Anr.1 wherein this Court had directed to seize the
hypothecated vehicles by taking forcible physical possession as also by
appointing the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay as a receiver of the
vehicles with liberty to the petitioner to sell the said hypothecated
vehicles by private treaty.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the respondents
would not dispute that there is a default on the part of his clients to
make regular payment of the loan installments. He would submit that
however there is a dispute between the parties in regard to the interest
and the default penalty as levied by the petitioner. Although the
proceedings were adjourned from time to time, Mr. Shah is also not in a
position to contend that the loans can be regularized, by the
respondents in each of these cases.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused
the record, in my opinion, in the above facts and circumstances of the
case, Mr. Daver would be correct in his contention that the appropriate
interim measures to protect the arbitral interest of the petitioner needs
1 Arbitration Petition No.1375 of 2019
- 15 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
to be granted, by this Court and more particularly considering the
several orders passed in similar matters by different benches of this
Court and the order dated 25 November, 2019 as passed in the case of
Citi Bank (supra).
9. Mr. Daver would inform the Court that the vehicles are now lying
in the vicinity of four depots of the petitioner, the details of which are
placed on record, as also furnished to the respondents. Mr. Daver has
contended that the Court Receiver, High Court, ought to be appointed,
relying on the several orders as passed by this Court in such
proceedings. Mr. Shah would however fairly submit that in the present
case as the respondents are ready and willing to bring these vehicles to
the nearest depots, the details of which are already shared by the
respondents with the petitioner, the Court Receiver need not be
appointed. He also submits that respondents have no objection for the
petitioner to sell the vehicles for which, he states that assistance shall be
provided to the respondents. The suggestion of Mr. Shah is quite fair
and is required to be accepted in the peculiar facts of the case. Mr.
Daver's contention is that these 33 vehicles can be brought to the
nearest depots of the petitioner, so that the possession of the vehicles
can be taken up by the petitioner. It is submitted that thereafter the
vehicles can be sold by the petitioner to realise the amounts due and
payable by the respondents, as permitted under the hypothecation
agreements. Responding to Mr. Daver's contention, Mr. Shah, on
instructions, states that the vehicles can be brought to each of the depots
within a period of two weeks from today. Statement of Mr. Shah is
accepted.
- 16 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
10. It is not in dispute that there is an arbitration agreement between
the parties and the parties would be thus required to be referred to the
arbitral tribunal for adjudication of the disputes on the loan agreements.
11. In the above circumstances, the following order would meet the
ends of justice:-
ORDER
i. The respondents are directed to bring 33 vehicles to the nearest depots, the details of which are already shared by the petitioner with the respondents as also placed on record of this Court which is marked "X" for identification.
ii. The petitioner is permitted to sell the vehicles in accordance with the hypothecation agreement so as to realize the amount due and payable by the respondents.
iii. Respondents shall assist the petitioner by bringing buyers in sale of the said vehicles.
iv. In so far as the amounts as received by the respondents from IOCL as noted by this Court in the earlier orders, Mr.Shah, learned Counsel for the respondents has agreed that the proportionate amount qua the 33 vehicles after the permissible adjustment under the contract with IOCL, shall be deposited with the petitioners within a period of two weeks from today. The statement of Mr.Shah is accepted. This shall include the amount of Rs.5 Lakhs which inadvertently paid despite the prohibitory order passed by this Court. Mr. Shah states that such amount is not utilized.
- 17 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp v. Let this exercise be completed within a period of two week from today.
vi. Till the vehicles are deposited the respondents are directed not to create any third party rights and/or in any manner deal with or damage the vehicles.
Order on the proceedings filed under Section 11, 14 and 15 of the Act
12. There is no dispute in regard to the arbitration agreement between the parties. In so far as the contention as urged by Mr. Shah in the petitions under Section 14 read with Section 15 of the Act are concerned, Mr. Shah would be right in his contention that there is an unilateral appointment of the arbitral tribunal by the petitioner and the same may not be in accordance with law considering the settled position of law as laid down in the decisions of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects D.P.C. vs. H.S.C.C. (India) Ltd.2 . Thus in such matters, where unilateral appointment is made, the same may not satisfy the test in law, hence the parties would be required to be referred for adjudication of the disputes by appointing an independent arbitral tribunal.
13. In any case, the parties are agreeable that the disputes be referred to arbitration by appointing an arbitral tribunal, with liberty to the parties to agitate all contentions, including on interim measures. Hence the following order:-
ORDER
(i) Mr. Nimay Dave, Advocate of this Court, is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes and differences between the parties under the Agreement for Sale dated 20 December, 2017;
2 2019 S.C.C. Online SC 1517
- 18 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp
(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 these proceedings with a copy to be forwarded to both the parties;
(iii) 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;
(iv) All contentions of the parties on merits of the disputes are expressly kept open;
(v) The parties are permitted to seek interim reliefs as may be permissible in law before the arbitral tribunal. All contentions in that regard are expressly kept open.
(vi) Let the Statement of Claim be also filed by the petitioner within three weeks after the learned sole arbitrator enters reference.
(viii) The parties are at liberty to make a prayer before the arbitral tribunal to treat the present proceedings as one reference.
(ix) The fees payable to the arbitral tribunal shall be in accordance with the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to the Arbitrators) Rules, 2018;
(x) All proceedings stand disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
- 19 - 5 to 7-arbpl 20309-21 grp (xi) In view of disposal of the petitions, pending interim applications
would not survive. They are accordingly disposed of.
(xii) Office to forward a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator on the following address:
" Mr. Nimay Dave, Advocate 103, First Floor, Oval House, British Hotel Lane, Off. N.M. Road, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001. Mobile -
E-mail ID - [email protected]"
[G.S. KULKARNI, J.]