Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(ii) Once the mortgage claim is given up in the arbitration proceedings, the Respondents take the position of an unsecured creditor and an attachment can be ordered only on a ground contained in Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; and

(iii) The extent of the attachment which has been ordered is excessive in comparison with the claim in arbitration.

7. In both the cases in appeal, it is common ground that the claim in arbitration is not for the enforcement of a mortgage. In both cases, the two creditors have asserted a claim for the recovery of monies due and outstanding. Order XXXIV Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides as follows :

"O.34, R.14 : Suit for sale necessary for bringing mortgaged property to sale.-

(1) Where a mortgagee has obtained a decree for the payment of money in satisfaction of a claim arising under the mortgage, he shall not be entitled to bring the mortgaged property to sale otherwise than by instituting a suit for sale in enforcement of the mortgage, and he may institute such suit notwithstanding anything contained in Order II, Rule 2.

The exercise of the power under Section 9 cannot be totally independent of those principles. At the same time, the Court when it decides a petition under Section 9 must have due regard to the underlying purpose of the conferment of the power upon the Court which is to promote the efficacy of arbitration as a form of dispute resolution. Just as on the one hand the exercise of the power under Section 9 cannot be carried out in an uncharted territory ignoring the basic principles of procedural law contained in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, the rigors of every procedural provision in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 cannot be put into place to defeat the grant of relief which would subserve the paramount interests of justice. A balance has to be drawn between the two considerations in the facts of each case. The principles laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 for the grant of interlocutory remedies must furnish a guide to the Court when it determines an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The underlying basis of Order 38 Rule 5 therefore has to be borne in mind while deciding an application under Section 9(ii)

(b)."

10. The principle is that when the Court decides a petition under Section 9, the principles which have been laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for the grant of interlocutory reliefs furnish a guide to the Court. Similarly in an application for attachment, the underlying basis of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 would have to be borne in mind. At the same time it needs to be noted that the rigors of every procedural provision of the CPC cannot be put into place to defeat the grant of relief which would subserve the paramount interests of the 9 of 11 APP(L).131.2013 justice. The object of preserving the efficacy of arbitration as an effective form of dispute resolution must be duly fulfilled. This would necessarily mean that in deciding an application under Section 9, the Court would while bearing in mind the fundamental principles underlying the provisions of the CPC, at the same time, have the discretion to mould the relief in appropriate cases to secure the ends of justice and to preserve the sanctity of the arbitral process.