Bombay High Court
Shree Sati Travels Pvt. Ltd vs Amadeus India Pvt. Tld on 2 March, 2016
Bench: Anoop V. Mohta
Rng 1
app536.14.nm1324.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO.536 OF 2014
in
ARBITRATION PETITION NO.841 OF 2012 a/w NOTICE OF
MOTION NO.1324 OF 2014
M/s Shree Sati Travels Pvt.Ltd .. Appellant
vs
M/s Amadeus India Pvt Ltd .. Respondent
Mr.Shadab C.Peerzade i/b Mr.Munir Merchant for Appellant
Mr.Anand Mishra i/b Mr.Ashok Saraogi for Respondent
...
CORAM: ANOOP V.MOHTA AND
ig G.S.KULKARNI, JJ
DATE: 2ND MARCH 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per Anoop V.Mohta,J)
1. This Appeal is filed by the Original Respondent/Petitioner
under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Act) whereby a challenge is made to the order dated 31
January 2014 passed by the learned Judge after hearing the parties and
rejected the Petition and thereby maintained the reasoned award passed by
the Arbitrator who was appointed based upon an Agreement between the
parties referring to the transaction/contract in question. Admittedly, the
Appellant inspite of due service of notice by the Arbitrator including paper
publication with full knowledge about the arbitration proceedings
deliberately not participated before the Tribunal. Instead preferred a suit
app536.14.nm1324.14
in the Bombay City Civil Court seeking a perpetual injunction restraining
the Arbitrator from conducting the Arbitration proceedings. A statement is
made after hearing the parties that the Suit is also dismissed so also Notice
of motion taken out for injunction. The learned Arbitrator after considering
the uncontroverted statement of claim supported by documents including
evidence so laid by a reasoned order passed the award. The appropriate
part of the Award reads as under :
" This Forum of Arbitration on being satisfied with Evidence,
Documents, accept the claim of the Claimant and awards the claim of
refund of Rs.9,26,975/- (Rupees Nine lacs Thirty seven thousand nine
hundred seventy five only) along with the claim of interest at the rate of
24% per annum from 09.01.2008 to be aid by Respondent to the
Claimant till the realization of both the amounts awarded. So far as the
rate of interest is concerned on the amount of Rs.9,26975/- this Forum by
this award allows the Claimant to be entitled to recover interest @ 15%
per annum in view of the average of Bank and Market interest rate from
09.01.2008 till the realization of the Principal Claimed Refund Amount.
Claimant is entitled to seek the enforcement of this award/order through
the competent court of law at Delhi having jurisdiction as per terms of
the Agreement. Announced in open Court.Claimant may apply for the
issue of copy of the Award which will be issued to him on 08.09.2009
along with Attested Award Annexures."
Place: Delhi
Dated: 07.09.2009 S/d H.R.Banga
Advocate/Arbitrator
2. The submission that as the Award was passed ex-parte and
therefore, in breach of principles of natural justice and further that no
specific reasons are given by the learned Arbitrator while awarding the
app536.14.nm1324.14
amount in the present Petition and the circumstances are unacceptable.
The learned Arbitrator after following due procedure as required under the
said Act based upon the Agreement between the parties has correctly
observed that the Appellant has intentionally defaulted and not appeared
before the Tribunal though served with the claim as well as the supporting
documents. Therefore the Award so passed in the present circumstances in
no way, can be stated to be against provisions of law and/or even settled
principles of natural justice. This is in the background of the said Act itself
which provides the powers to the Arbitrators to proceed in case of such
defaults. Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the reasoned order
so passed by the learned Arbitrator, who after considering the rival
contentions, as well as, submissions based upon material available along
with reasons so recorded, rejected the Petition filed by the Petitioner under
section 34 of the said Act.
3. Therefore, Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Notice of
Motion also stands disposed of accordingly.
G.S.KULKARNI, J ANOOP V.MOHTA J
app536.14.nm1324.14
app536.14.nm1324.14
app536.14.nm1324.14
app536.14.nm1324.14
