Arbitration Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was allowed due to consistent default in payments. Earlier order appointing court receiver was confirmed. Liberty granted to respondents to settle if possible.
Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a-i), (b) and (e) of the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
arbp934.09.sxw
1
ssm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 934 OF 2009
L & T Finance Ltd. ....Petitioner. Vs. Sai Baba Construction & Anr. ....Respondents.
Sai Baba Construction & Anr.
Ms. Shakuntala Joshi i/by M/s. S.I. Joshi for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents.
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2011
P.C.:
The Petitioner has invoked Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act). There is a consistent default in making the payment, though agreed. The Respondents, however, still using the equipments without due payment till this date. The averments made in the Petition, remained uncontroverted. This Court on 14th December, 2009, after considering the same, has appointed the Court Receiver. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner makes statement that the Court Receiver could not take possession as the Respondents expressed willingness to settle the matter. The matter was adjourned from time to time for settlement,
2 arbp934.09.sxw
ssm
but in vain. The Respondents by one or the other reason postponing the execution of the order already passed.
and (e). Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the arbitration petition invoking Section 9 of the Act should be allowed in view of consistent default in payment.
Whether the earlier order of appointment of court receiver should be confirmed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
L & T Finance Ltd.
Sai Baba Construction & Anr.
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
