Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vodafone Spacetel Ltd., filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim measures against the respondent, S Tel Pvt. Ltd., for alleged breaches of the Intra-Circle Roaming Framework Agreement dated 15th March 2011. The petitioner claimed that the respondent failed to pay minimum commitment charges (MCC) as per the agreement and sought directions for the respondent to provide security in the form of a bank guarantee or asset attachment, and in the interim, to pay post-dated cheques or have a charge on its bank account. The court noted that there was an arbitration clause in the agreement providing for dispute resolution by a three-member arbitral panel, with exclusive jurisdiction of Mumbai courts. The court heard the parties and reserved judgment. The court held that for grant of interim relief under Section 9, the petitioner must establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience in its favor, and likelihood of irreparable injury. The court found that the petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case for the relief sought, as the dispute involved disputed questions of fact regarding the breach and the amounts claimed. The court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioner's remedy lies in arbitration, and no interim protection was warranted at this stage.
Headnote
A) Arbitration - Interim Measures - Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Security for Claim - The petitioner sought direction to the respondent to provide bank guarantee or asset security for payments under a roaming agreement - Court held that for grant of interim relief under Section 9, a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury must be shown - Mere breach of contract does not automatically entitle a party to such relief - Petition dismissed as no prima facie case was made out (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, directing the respondent to provide security or pay post-dated cheques for alleged breaches of the Intra-Circle Roaming Framework Agreement.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- interim measures
- prima facie case
- balance of convenience
- irreparable injury
- security for claim
- attachment before judgment
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (03) 82
Arbitration Petition No.104 of 2012
Dr. Veerendra Tulzapurkar, Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. Arun Siwach i/b Amarchand & Mangaldas & S.A. Shroff & Co. for the petitioner; Mr. Amit Vyas a/w Mr. Varun Manmiya i/b Rajani Associates for the respondent.
Vodafone Spacetel Ltd. (Formerly known as Vodafone Essar Spacetel Ltd.)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures pending arbitration.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought direction to respondent to provide security in form of bank guarantee or asset to secure payments, and interim direction to pay post-dated cheques or attachment of bank account.
Filing Reason
Alleged breach of Intra-Circle Roaming Framework Agreement by respondent for non-payment of minimum commitment charges.
Issues
Whether the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Whether the balance of convenience lies in favor of the petitioner and whether irreparable injury would be caused if interim relief is not granted.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that respondent committed breaches of the agreement by not paying minimum commitment charges, and sought security for the amounts due.
Respondent opposed the petition, likely disputing the breach and the amounts claimed.
Ratio Decidendi
For grant of interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner must establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience in its favor, and likelihood of irreparable injury. Mere breach of contract does not automatically entitle a party to such relief; the court must assess the strength of the case and the need for protection.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has invoked section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim measures and reliefs against the respondent in view of various breaches committed by the respondent under the Intra-Circle Roaming Framework Agreement dated 15th March, 2011 (ICRFA).
There exists an arbitration clause in the agreement.
The basic prayers of the petitioner is as under : (a) Direct the Respondent to provide appropriate security in the form of Bank Guarantee or asset to secure the payments towards the services provided by the Petitioner. (b) In the interim pending disposal of this petition, the Respondent be directed to pay Post Dates Cheques as also charge on the bank account by way of attachment to the extent of the dues.
Procedural History
The petition was filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Heard by consent finally on 19.3.2012 and judgment pronounced on 28.3.2012.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 9
