Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Gujarat State Disaster Management ... vs M/S Aska Equipments Ltd on 26 February, 2024
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO 3160 OF 2024
(Arising out out of SLP (C) No of 2024)
(Diary No 4861/2024)
Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority ... Appellant
Versus
M/s Aska Equipments Ltd ... Respondent
ORDER
1 Delay condoned.
2 Leave granted.
3 On 10 November 2017, an ex parte award was passed by the Uttarakhand State
Micro and Small Industries Facilitation Council 1 constituted under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act 2016 in Suit No 141/15-16. By the ex parte award, the appellant was directed to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 10,50,80,822.
4 The award was challenged by the appellant under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. On 12 October 2021, the Additional District Judge (Commercial), Dehradun set aside the award. 5 Signature Not Verified The respondent instituted an appeal under Section 37. The appeal was disposed Digitally signed by 1 NEETA SAPRA Date: 2024.03.01 15:33:18 IST “Facilitation Council” Reason:
2
of by a Division Bench of the High Court of Uttarakhand on 10 January 2023 while recording that the respondent (M/s Aska Equipments Ltd) was ready and willing to accept the order of the Commercial Court setting aside the award and to re- initiate arbitration proceedings, the High Court, accordingly remanded the proceedings back to the arbitral tribunal to render a fresh award after hearing the parties “on the basis of the record already available”. 6 The appellant moved the tribunal for permission to file its reply. The tribunal declined to grant permission on the ground that a reply had already been filed on 4 March 2016 to which a rejoinder has been filed. The contention of the appellant was that it had not filed a reply in the true sense and submitted some parawise comments.
7 The appellant then moved the High Court for modification of its order to enable it to file a reply before the arbitral tribunal. The application was dismissed by the High Court by the impugned order dated 17 October 2023.
8 We have heard Mr Huzefa Ahmadi, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Ms Shilpa Chauhan, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
9 Admittedly, the ex parte award of the Facilitation Council was set aside by the Additional District Judge (Commercial). The order setting aside the award has attained finality since the respondent withdrew the appeal under Section 37.
However, while permitting the withdrawal of the appeal, the High Court directed in para 2 of its order that the re-initiated arbitration proceedings should be concluded “on the basis of the record already available”. 3 10 The above observation of the High Court, indicating that the re-initiated proceedings would be disposed of “on the basis of the record already available” was unnecessary once the respondent accepted the setting aside of the award and was intending to pursue proceedings afresh before the Facilitation Council. Moreover, the High Court also indicated that a fresh award has to be passed by the Facilitation Council.
11 Bearing in mind the above aspects, we are of the considered view that the observation of the High Court in paragraph 2 of its order dated 10 January 2023 to the effect that the arbitral tribunal shall pass an award “on the basis of the record already available” would have to be duly corrected. As a consequence, we set aside the direction contained in paragraph 2 of the judgment of the High Court dated 10 January 2023, namely, “on the basis of the record already available”.
12 The impugned order dated 17 October 2023 rejecting the modification application is in consequence set aside. 13 The arbitral tribunal shall abide by the above clarification. The appellant shall file its reply by 15 March 2024. The respondent is permitted to file its replication, if so advised, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 14 The Facilitation Council shall thereafter be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
415 The appeal shall accordingly stand disposed of. 16 Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
…...…...….......………………....…CJI.
[Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud] …...…...….......………………....…..J. [J B Pardiwala] …...…...….......………………....…..J. [Manoj Misra] New Delhi;
February 26, 2024
GKA
5
ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.1 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).4861/2024 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-10-2023 in MCC No. 04/2023 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital) GUJARAT STATE DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY Appellant(s) VERSUS M/S ASKA EQUIPMENTS LTD Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.27648/2024-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.27650/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.27651/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.27652/2024-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ) Date : 26-02-2024 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA
For Appellant(s) Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ajay Kumar, AOR
Mr. Pinakin M Raval, Adv.
Mr. Pushkar Priyadarshi, Adv.
Mr. Gyan Prakash, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Jitender Chaudhary, Adv.
Ms. Shilpa Chohan, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Singh, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 Delay condoned.
2 Leave granted.
63 The appeal shall stand disposed of in terms of the signed order. 4 Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (BEENA JOLLY)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)