Dismissed

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Limited v. M/S.Ardeshir B.Cursetjee & Sons Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Dec 2013OP(C)/3339/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's move to terminate arbitration proceedings on fraud grounds. The Court held that interfering with an active arbitration where evidence is voluminous and the award awaited would be inequitable and prejudicial, citing Section 16 of the Arbitration Act for fraud claims.

What did the court decide?

The original petition directing termination of arbitration proceedings was disposed of by dismissing the petitioner's prayer.

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Limited Vs M/S.Ardeshir… — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935

¶5

OP(C).No. 3339 of 2013 (O)

¶6

------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER IN OP 1115/2012 OF ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 12.04.2013

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

THE FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LIMITED UDYOGAMANDAL P.O., ERNAKULAM - 683501 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY K.V.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR (SR.) SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.NITHIN GEORGE

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

M/S.ARDESHIR B.CURSETJEE & SONS LTD 2ND FLOOR, MACKINNON MACKENZIE BUILDING 4 SHOORJI VALLABHDAS MARG, BALLARD ESTATE MUMBAI-400 001.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.C.M.ANDREWS SRI. ABRAHAM MARKOS

¶13

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

DCS

¶15

OP(C).No. 3339 of 2013 (O)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT P1 : TRUECOPY OF THE VIGILANCE REPORT (COMPLAINT NO.21/03) DT.17-1-2004.

¶19

EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT (UNDER SECTION 173 CRPC), 17-10-2008 FILED BEFORE THE CBI COURT, ERNAKULAM.

¶20

EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE 164 STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN LEKHARI DT. 27-8-2005.

¶21

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SOLE ARBITRATOR DT.22-6-2012.

¶22

EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DT.17-7-2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SOLE ARBITRATOR.

¶23

EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER DT.14-8-2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.

¶24

EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED ARGUMENT NOTE FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SOLE ARBITRATOR DT.9-10-2012.

¶25

EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.5-11-2012 PASSED BY THE ARBITRATOR DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR TERMINATION OF ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS.

¶26

EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION OP NO.1115/2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DT. NIL.

¶27

EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE VTH ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE, ERNAKULAM DT.12-4-2013.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-

¶29

EXHIBIT R1(a) : TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION REQUEST NO. 57 OF 2005 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶30

DCS

¶31

OP(C).No. 3339 of 2013 (O)

¶32

EXHIBIT R1(b) : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN ARBITRATION REQUEST NO. 57 OF 2005 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶33

EXHIBIT R1(c) : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.06.2000 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN ARBITRATION REQUEST NO. 57 OF 2005

¶34

EXHIBIT R1(d) : TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN SLP(CIVIL) NO. 16365/2006 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

¶35

EXHIBIT R1(e) : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.08.2007 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLP (CIVIL) NO. 16365/2006, TOGETHER WITH JOINT APPLICATION FOR DISPOSAL OF THE SLP AND CONSENT TERMS

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

DCS

V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

¶40

-------------------------------

¶41

O.P.(Civil) No.3339 of 2013

¶42

------------------------------------- Dated this the 3^rd day of December, 2013

¶43

J U D G M E N T

¶44

Heard Adv. Nithin George on behalf of the petitioner and

¶45

Adv. Abraham Markos on behalf of the respondent in extenso.

¶46

It will be in equitable to interfere with Ext. P10 order of the District Court affirming Ext. P8 order of the Arbitrator declining the prayer to terminate the arbitration proceedings for the following reasons:-

¶47

i) Mr. Justice K.T. Thomas (retired) was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator on consent and also by order dated 06.08.2007 in SLP (Civil) No. 16365/2006 of the Supreme Court.

¶48

ii) The parties have let in voluminous evidence before the Arbitrator who conducted as many as 130 sittings and his award is awaited after the arguments.

¶49

iii) The plea based on fraud falls under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 only and not under Section 14(1)(a) and the motion of the petitioner is misconceived.

¶50

iv) The petitioner can very well invoke Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if there are good

¶51

O.P.(Civil) No.3339 of 2013 2

¶52

grounds and pursue the matter in appeal under Section 37 thereof if circumstances exists.

¶53

v) The Courts should not lightly interfere in the midst of the arbitral proceedings as held in M/s. S.B.P & Co. v. M/s. Patil Engineering Ltd and Another.

¶54

Any further elucidation of the points would prejudice the contention of the parties before the Arbitrator and further proceedings. The original petition is disposed of.

¶55

V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶56

DCS

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Limited v. M/S.Ardeshir B.Cursetjee & Sons Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Limited v. M/S.Ardeshir B.Cursetjee & Sons Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paul T.Kurian Vs Shanavas

Navas P.H Vs State of Kerala

Viswanathan K Vs Government of Kerala

K.Sivaprasad Vs Sri.K.G.Mohanlal

Sheeja Vs the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

M.Hidayath Vs Chief Manager (Authorised Officer)