Calcutta High Court
Nicco Corporation Limited vs Prysmian Cavi E Systemi Energia S.R.L.& ... on 18 March, 2009
Author: Patherya
Bench: Patherya
GA No. 678 of 2009
CS No. 69 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
Nicco Corporation Limited
Versus
Prysmian Cavi e Systemi Energia s.r.l.& Anr.
For Petitioner : Mr. Anindya Mitra, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Jishnu
Chowdhury
For Respondent No.1 :Mr.Jishnu Saha with Mr.Ranjan Bachawat, Mr.
R. Bhattacharyya.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE PATHERYA Date : 18th March, 2009.
The Court : This is an application for stay of arbitration proceedings initiated in Dubai. Counsel for the petitioner submits that by letter dated 27th February, 2009 the International Court of Arbitration informed the petitioner that a request for arbitration had been made to it by the respondent no.1 herein. The said letter was received through courier and within 30 days answer is to be submitted and Arbitrator appointed to constitute the Arbitral Tribunal. In CS No.18 of 2009 an order was passed restraining the respondent no.1 herein (who was the respondent no.2 therein) from giving any effect to the letter dated 14th January, 2009. Therefore, the proceedings before the International Tribunal is contrary to the order passed. Hence this application has been filed for interim reliefs.
Counsel for the respondent no.1 intervened in the matter and seeks service of a copy of the application. Such copy has been given to the Counsel and time is sought to take instruction in the matter. It is also submitted that the order dated 2nd February, 2009 was challenged in appeal and liberty to the respondent no.1 to proceed in accordance with law has been left open. Therefore, the reference of disputes to arbitration is nothing but action 2 taken in accordance with law. The letter dated 27th February, 2009 was received through courier and therefore, a day's delay will not prejudice the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submits that in view of the facsimile message dated 16th March, 2009 sent by the Advocates of the respondent no.1 to the International Court of Arbitration the non-filing of answer or non-appointment of the Arbitrator will be prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner as then the respondent has sought the International Court of Arbitration to appoint the respondent's Arbitrator.
Having considered the submissions of the parties assuming that the letter dated 27th February, 2009 was received by the petitioner on the same day, such 30 days is to expire on 27th March, 2009. Accordingly the matter is adjourned till 19th March, 2009 to enable the respondents to take instruction in the matter.
Counsel for the respondent no.1 submits that no step will be taken to activate the International Court of Arbitration for any lapse on the part of the petitioner till 19th March, 2009.
All parties to act on a xerox signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.
( PATHERYA, J.) pa