Delhi High Court
Shivam Sharma vs M/S Alankit Assignments Ltd. on 13 July, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO No.75/2017
% 13th July, 2017
SHIVAM SHARMA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Vivek Singh, Advocate.
versus
M/S ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LTD. ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Pratiksha Chaturvedi,
Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. This First Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration &
Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) is filed by
the appellant/objector impugning the order of the court below dated
8.9.2016 by which objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of
the Act have been dismissed against the Award dated 9.11.2015 passed
by the Arbitrator dismissing the claim petition filed by the
respondent/claimant.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was a
constituent/client of the respondent/broker and who was a member of
the National Stock Exchange. Disputes and differences arose between
the parties with respect to trades conducted during the year 2015. The
case of the appellant was that trades were conducted without his having
placed orders for the trades undertaken whereas the respondent had
contended that not only the trades were conducted in terms of the
instructions of the appellant/objector/client but that with respect to
each and every trade the appellant was notified both by email and
SMS, and therefore, the appellant cannot contend that he never had
given instructions for conducting of the trades. Arbitrator by the
Award has held that the appellant was not entitled to contend that
trades were conducted without his knowledge and
permission/instructions inasmuch as all the trades are duly confirmed
to the registered email account of the appellant/client and also by
means of SMSs sent to the concerned phone number of the appellant.
Accordingly Award was passed rejecting the claims of the appellant.
3. The court below has considered all aspects and held that
once the Arbitrator has considered all aspects of merits and arrived at
findings which arise from the facts and evidence appearing on record,
such an Award cannot be interfered with, and with these observations
this Court completely agrees. The relevant observations of the court
below are contained in paras 6 and 7 of the impugned judgment of the
court below, and which paras read as under:-
"6. Perusal of the impugned award dated 09.11.2015 passed by the Ld.
Sole Arbitrator reveals that all the abovesaid aspects have been dealt with by
the Ld. Arbitrator. The Ld. Arbitrator has stated that the respondent no.1
relied upon the ledger account, contract notes and SMS messages. The Ld.
Arbitrator has come to the conclusion that the respondent no.1 had been
sending the account by E-mail and the petitioner herein also received the
SMS messages during the disputed period but no objection was raised at all
by the petitioner after the receipt of the contract notes received by him
during the disputed period. The Ld. Arbitrator has come to the conclusion
that the petitioner was fully aware of the trades done in the disputed period
in his account but he chose not to raise any objections to the trade. Ld.
Arbitrator has further come to the conclusion that there was enough
evidence on record to show that the petitioner was fully aware of the trade
done during the disputed period but he chose not to object to the same. I am
of the opinion that the Ld. Arbitrator has rightly observed that as per the
own admission of the petitioner, his father was having a direct contract with
the respondent no.1. The father of the petitioner was ringing up on behalf of
the petitioner to the respondent no.1. The E-log of the record of the contract
notes sent to the petitioner by the respondent no.1 on the registered E-mail
address of the petitioner was also filed by the respondent no.1 before the Ld.
Arbitrator. Ld. Arbitrator has further observed that there was no dispute of
E-mail address of the petitioner. The Ld. Arbitrator has further held that the
petitioner had accepted the receipt of SMS and E-mail of the contract notes
sent by NSE in this regard.
7. To my mind, the abovesaid observations as contained in the
impugned award dated 09.11.2015 passed by th Ld. Sole Arbitrator are
based after appreciation of the evidence led by the parties and after a close
scrutiny of the documents placed on record by both the parties. To my
mind, the petitioner has failed to point out as to how the present petition
falls within the ambit and purview of Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act. I have no hesitation to hold that the impugned award
dated 09.11.2015 passed by the Ld. Arbitrator cannot be said to be against
the public policy of India or against the settled principles of law. As a
result, the present petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. The file
of the Ld. Arbitrator be sent back against receipt.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance."
(underlining added)
4. The aforesaid conclusions of the court below are
unimpeachable inasmuch as the scope of hearing objections under
Section 34 of the Act is limited. Once the Arbitrator arrives at findings
on the basis of the evidence on record and the documents filed, a court
hearing objections under Section 34 of the Act does not sit as an
appellate court to re-apprise the evidence, findings of facts and
conclusions which are drawn by the Arbitrator.
5. There is no merit in the appeal. Dismissed.
JULY 13, 2017 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
Ne
