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 1, Cited by 2]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Bhadani Associates vs Kamlini Dharamraj Ashar on 26 March, 2018

Bench: Chief Justice, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud

     SLP(C)Nos.5674-75/18                              1

     ITEM NO.8                            COURT NO.1                   SECTION IX

                                S U P R E M E C O U R T O F         I N D I A
                                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).5674-5675/2018

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-03-2017
     in CS No.22/2016 in EA No.4 of 2016 and order dated 12-10-2017 in
     CA No.62/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay)

     BHADANI ASSOCIATES                                                  Petitioner(s)

                                                     VERSUS

     KAMLINI DHARAMRAJ ASHAR & ORS.                                      Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.10399/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY
     IN FILING and IA No.10400/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING and
     IA No.22277/2018-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)

     Date : 26-03-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
                         HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD

     For Petitioner(s)                Mr.Ranjit Kumar, Sr.Adv.
                                      Mr.Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
                                      Mr.Yatin Shah, Adv.
                                      Mr.Gaurav Goel, Adv.
                                      Mr.Abhinav Agrawal, Adv.
                                      Mr.Himanshu Satija, Adv.
                                      Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
                                      Mr.Gurjeet Singh, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)                Mr.C.A.Sundaram, Sr.Adv.
                                      Mr.Rahul Chitnis, Adv.
                                      Mr.Aaditya A.Pande, Adv.
                                      Mr.Chirag Shah, Adv.
                                      Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR

                          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                             O R D E R

Signature Not Verified Delay condoned.

Digitally signed by

CHETAN KUMAR Date: 2018.03.27 17:52:30 TLT Reason: When the matter was listed on 19.02.2018, this Court passed the following order:

“Heard Mr.Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel SLP(C)Nos.5674-75/18 2 for the petitioner.
Delay in filing and refiling the special leave petition is condoned.
As Mr.Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel along with Mr.Rahul Chitnis, learned counsel has entered appearance for the respondents, no further notice need be issued.
A suggestion has been given to learned counsel for the parties to consider whether the interest component awarded by the learned Arbitrator at the rate of 18% per annum could be reduced to 10% per annum from the date of the award till the date of payment. Learned counsel for the parties pray for some time to obtain instructions.
Call on 5.3.2018.” Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr.C.A.Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the interest rate be fixed at 6% per annum. The same was seriously opposed by Mr.Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner relying on Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Without taking into consideration the grievance and the applicability of Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, we think that the cause of justice would be sub-served if the interest rate is determined at 9% per annum from the date of award till the date of payment. Ordered accordingly.
With the aforesaid modification in the order of the High Court, the special leave petitions stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to cots.
As a sequel to the above, pending interlocutory application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(Chetan Kumar )                                                  (H.S.Parasher)
 Court Master                                                 Assistant Registrar