High Court Hears Petition Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act Challenging Arbitral Award for Alleged Procedural Irregularities. Award Directed Petitioner Company to Pay Net Amount After Allowing Counter Claim, Raising Issues of Service of Counter Claim and Natural Justice.

High Court: Bombay High Court
  • 331
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The present petition was filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging in part an Arbitral Award dated 23rd November, 2023. The Arbitral Award allowed the claim of Petitioner No.1 (Claimant) for Rs.59,97,210/- and also allowed the Counter Claim of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for Rs.1,25,69,768/-, directing Petitioner No.1 to pay the net amount of Rs.65,72,558/-. The dispute arose from a Loan Agreement dated 29th January, 2010 between L&T Finance Company as lender and Respondent No.1 as borrower for Rs.2,85,70,000/- with interest at 6.26% p.a., secured by hypothecation of assets and guarantees. Default occurred, and the lender sold the assets for Rs.1.10 Crores, reducing its claim. The Petitioner alleged that the Counter Claim was not served properly and that the Arbitrator proceeded ex parte, violating natural justice. The procedural history detailed multiple arbitration meetings, substitutions of parties, and delays, culminating in the Arbitrator hearing the Counter Claim in the Petitioner's absence. The judgment text provided only factual narration and does not contain the court's analysis or final decision.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the arbitral award is liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on grounds of procedural irregularity and denial of natural justice

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996
  • Section 34
  • challenge to arbitral award
  • natural justice
  • service of counter claim
  • procedural fairness
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 Lawtext (BOM) (6) 134

I.A. (L) NO.6246 OF 2024 IN COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION (L)NO.5565 OF 2024

2024-06-13

FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA,J.

Mr. Ranjeev Carvahlo with Ms. Aaushi Doshi and Mr. Deep Dighe i/b. DS Law, for the Applicant/ Petitioner. Mr. Aditya Shiralkar with Ms. Garima Mehrotra and Mr. Satish Desai, for Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.

Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 2

Respondent No. 1, Respondent No. 2, Respondent No. 3

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award

Remedy Sought

Setting aside in part the Arbitral Award dated 23rd November, 2023

Filing Reason

Alleged procedural irregularities including improper service of Counter Claim and denial of opportunity to respond

Previous Decisions

Arbitral Award dated 23rd November, 2023 allowed Claimant's claim for Rs.59,97,210/- and Counter Claim for Rs.1,25,69,768/-, directing net payment of Rs.65,72,558/- by Petitioner No.1

Judgment Excerpts

The present Petition has been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the Arbitration Act"), challenging in part the Arbitral Award dated 23rd November, 2023 passed by the learned Arbitrator. By the impugned Award, the learned Arbitrator allowed the claim of Petitioner No.1 (Claimant) for a sum of Rs.59,97,210/-. At the same time, the Arbitrator allowed the Counter Claim filed by Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for a sum of Rs.1,25,69,768/- and, accordingly, after giving credit for the claim amount, directed Petitioner No.1 to pay Respondents a sum of Rs.65,72,558/-. It is the case of the Petitioner that a copy of this Counter Claim was only served on Petitioner No.1 vide an e-mail dated 23rd June, 2023 and that too without annexures.

Procedural History

Loan Agreement dated 29-01-2010; Default and recall notice dated 01-06-2011; Arbitration invoked; Statement of Claim filed 28-06-2011; Respondent objected to Arbitrator appointment 29-11-2012; Valuation Report submitted 29-04-2013; Assets sold for Rs.1.10 Crores, claim reduced 21-11-2014; Multiple arbitration hearings from 2014 to 2023 with various orders; Counter Claim filed 05-12-2017; Petitioner No.1 substituted 27-09-2022; Petitioner No.2 informed assignment 21-10-2022; Issues framed 18-04-2023; On 14-06-2023, Petitioner absent, arguments heard on Counter Claim, hearing closed; Advocate for Petitioner requested Counter Claim copy on 22-06-2023; incomplete Counter Claim forwarded 23-06-2023; E-mail of 27-06-2023 seeking further documents.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Refusal to Register Conveyance Deed Between Builder and Cooperative Housing Society. Registering Authority Cannot Refuse Registration on Grounds Outside Indian Registration Act, 1908.
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Quashes Child Welfare Committee’s Custody Order Under Section 37(1)(d) of Juvenile Justice Act During Pending Guardians and Wards Act Proceedings Before Family Court. Committee Lacks Jurisdiction to Take Custody from One Parent...