Partly allowed

M/S Overseas Pharma Private Limited v. Rajya Vokkaligara Sangha

Karnataka HC23 Sept 2022COMAP/304/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appellant s appeal regarding the order refusing arbitrator appointment but partly allowed it to direct appointment of a retired judge as arbitrator and fixed interim payment of accrued dues by the appellant.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of retired High Court judge as arbitrator; direction to appellant to pay 50% of accrued licence dues of Rs.42 lakh within eight weeks as interim arrangement.

M/S Overseas Pharma Private Limited Vs Rajya Vokkaligara Sangha — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI COMAP NO.304/2022

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S. OVERSEAS PHARMA PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND EXISTING UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.941, 1^ST FLOOR, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, 22^ND CROSS, BANASHANKARI, 2^ND STAGE, OPP. BDA COMPLEX, BENGALURU – 560070 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SRI. T.THIMMEGOWDA S/O LATE SRI. THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.

¶10

... APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI VIVEK SUBBAREDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRIYUTHS PRADEEP S.SAWKAR, SUNDARSWAMY AND RAMDAS, ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND: RAJYA VOKKALIGARA SANGHA A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960

¶13

¶14

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.148, KRISHNA RAJENDRA ROAD, VISVESHWARAPURA, BENGALURU-560 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶15

... RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI D.N.NANJUNDA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SUDHANVA D.S, ADV.)

¶17

THIS COMAP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1-A) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27/06/2022 IN COM.A.A.NO.232/2021 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ETC.

¶18

THIS COMAP COMING ON FOR “PRELIMINARY HEARING” THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Heard the learned senior counsel Sri Vivek Subba

¶21

Reddy on behalf of the appellant and the learned senior counsel Sri D.N. Nanjunda Reddy on behalf of the respondent-Sangha.

¶22

Though several grounds have been raised in impugning the order under challenge, it was candidly pointed-out that the appellant has already resorted to the procedure of appointment of an Arbitrator and in that

¶23

¶24

direction has filed CMP No.698/2022 and that the same is pending. In that view of the matter, on a suggestion from the Court, the parties agreed to have the issues finally settled by the Arbitral Tribunal and pray that in the meanwhile, certain amicable interim arrangement be ordered pending initiation of the arbitral proceedings. In that view of the matter, the parties having resolved and having agreed upon to appoint former judge of this Court Hon’ble Shri Justice V. Jagannathan (Retd.), we deem it appropriate to pass the following order:-

¶25

The appeal is partly allowed in the following terms:-

¶26

1. The learned Justice Shri V. Jagannathan (Retd.) is requested to act as an Arbitrator in the disputes that have arisen and are subsisting between the parties.

¶27

1. The appellant is directed to pay 50% of the accrued dues i.e. arrears of licence fee which is said to have been fixed at Rs.42.00 lakhs per month. The said amount shall be paid within a period of eight weeks.

¶28

1. The dues under the head of licence fee accrued as on today in respect of future licence fee i.e. commencing from October, 2022, the appellant

¶29

¶30

shall pay the licence fee fixed under the licence agreement.

¶31

It is made clear that the stipulation regarding

¶32

payment of amounts is subject to final orders that may be passed by the Tribunal and this shall not be construed as determining the rate of licence fee or the sums due from one party to the other.

¶33

The above is only by way of an interim arrangement and all issues raised by the parties is left open to be decided by the Arbitrator.

¶34

5. We request the learned Arbitrator to expedite

¶35

and pass the award at the earliest in view of the fact that the term of the licence settlement is said to comes to an end by February, 2023.

¶36

6. It is needless to state that parties shall maintain

¶37

status-quo with regard to the business arrangement of dispensing of medicines within the premises of the

¶38

¶39

respondent-Sangha for which the fees are charged accordingly.

¶40

A copy of this order be transmitted to Hon’ble Shri Justice V. Jagannathan (Retd).

¶41

Office to draw-up a decree accordingly.

¶42

In view of disposal of the appeal, pending I.As. do not survive for consideration and is accordingly, disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

chs CT-HR

M/S Overseas Pharma Private Limited v. Rajya Vokkaligara Sangha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Overseas Pharma Private Limited v. Rajya Vokkaligara Sangha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Mavinaholeappa Vs State of Karnataka

The Karnataka Public Service Commission Vs Smt. Sujyoti Bhat

Sri. Srinivasa Setty Vs Inspector General of Police