Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

21. Mr. Kelkar, the learned counsel for the applicants submitted that in the face of these documents and incontrovertible position that disputes arose between the applicants and respondents, the resistance to appointment of arbitrator to resolve the disputes, in accordance with the terms of the agreements which incorporate specific arbitration clause, is inconceivable. Mr. Kelkar submitted that SMSA dated 13th August, 2014 and Agreement to Lease dated 8th September, 2014 contain clear and explicit arbitration agreements, is incontestable. All the defences now sought to be raised to the reference of the dispute to arbitration are technical defences which are beyond the scope of inquiry under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Amplifying the submission, Mr. Kelkar would urge that the alleged improper invocation of the arbitration, and invocation arbap-227-2019_.doc sans a valid authorization on behalf of the applicant LLP are the matters clearly beyond the scope of inquiry under section 11 of the Act, 1996. The defence of misjoinder of respondent Nos. 1 to 4, according to Mr. Kelkar, is wholly untenable. Nor the contention that the invocation is premature for want of mediation is worthy of consideration.

44. On the aforesaid touchstone, it may be apposite to first consider the common grounds of objection to the reference of the disputes to arbitration. Invocation of arbitration was sought to be assailed on the ground that the respective LLP firms had neither authorized the invocation of the arbitration nor the notices invoking the arbitration were issued for and on behalf of the applicant LLPs. This submission is required to be appreciated in the backdrop of the peculiar composition of the LLPs. Indisputably, the LLPs were formed by partners representing the Goenkas and Birlas. Undoubtedly, the notices invoking the arbitration, start with the description of Chandraprakash Goenka and arbap-227-2019_.doc Sandeep Goenka as the persons on whose behalf the notices were issued. However, I am not persuaded to throw the invocation overboard on the said count alone. In my view, the substance of the matter is required to be considered. The notices of invocation refer to the transactions between the parties, the execution of the instruments in furtherance of the agreements between the parties, the purported cause for the dispute and resolution thereof through arbitration. In the totality of the circumstances, especially having regard to the composition of the LLPs, the invocation cannot be faulted at.

45. Mr. Kanade would urge that the absence of the resolution by the LLPs is fatal to invocation of arbitration. The aforesaid factors constitute an answer to this challenge, as well. In any event, the invocation of arbitration does not seem to be one of the 'Reserved Matters' under the respective Deeds of LLPs, which could not have been dealt with by the designated partner. In my view, having regard to the composition of he LLPs, the submission based on absence of resolution does not merit acceptance as, if stretched too far, the applicant LLPs may be deprived of the right to invoke the remedies.

48. The material on record indicates that prior to invocation of arbitration, lengthy correspondence was exchanged between the parties. Things came to such a pass that the respondent No. 5 proposed termination of the Agreement to Lease. In any event, post institution of these applications, efforts were made to arbap-227-2019_.doc amicably resolve the disputes. In the circumstances, the challenge to the instant applications on the count of premature invocation of arbitration does not merit countenance.