Madras High Court
Jsw Minerals Trading Pvt. Ltd vs Lss Ocean Transport Dmcc on 26 August, 2021
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.08.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
and C.M.P.Nos.10453, 10457, 10456 and 10459 of 2021
JSW Minerals Trading Pvt. Ltd.
rep. by Mr.Jayanta Sinha,
Jindal Mansion, 5A,
Dr.G.Deshmukh Marg,
Mumbai City, 400 026 ... Appellant
Vs
1.LSS Ocean Transport DMCC,
Rep. by its Constituted Signatory,
having its registered office at Unit 2708
Jumeirah Business Centre 5
Cluster W Dubai,
United Arab Emirate
2.K.I (International) Ltd
rep. by its Director,
Having its registered office at
664, T.H.Road, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
3.Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd.,
1st Floor, 48-9-17, Dwarakanagar,
Vishakapatnam 530 016, Andhra Pradesh, India.
__________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
4.The Deputy Commissioner of Custom,
Krishnapatnam Custom House,
Muthukar, Krishnapatnam Port,
Nellore, Andhra Pradesh
5.Asta Lingam Times Trading Co.,
No.12, Royan Kottai STreet,
Kanchipuram 631 502. ... Respondents
Appeal filed against the Order dated 16.12.2020 in A.No.3114 of
2020 and A.No.231 of 2020 on the file of original side of this court.
For the Appellant : Mr.Naved Askari
for Mr.B.Deepak Narayanan
For the Respondent : Mr.Raja Majumdar,
Senior Counsel,
for Ms.Deepika Murali for R-1
: Mr.Arvind Srevatsa for R-2
: Mr.P.Giridharan for R-3
: Mr.A.P.Srinivas for R-4
: No appearance for R-5
*****
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The appeal is by a stranger to the arbitration agreement and a
non-party to the proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 before the arbitration court here. The
appellant's grievance is that it is the appellant's property on which an
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
order has been passed and the appellant is, to such extent, prejudiced
by the relevant order dated December 16, 2020.
2. Instead of receiving an appeal from the order, it may better
serve the interest of justice if the appellant is given leave to apply
before the arbitration court for recalling the relevant order to the
extent that it prejudices the appellant, particularly since the appellant
is not a party to the proceedings and the appellant could not have
been adversely affected by any order in such proceedings.
3. The first respondent herein, the petitioner in the proceedings
under Section 9 of the said Act before the arbitration court, has
assured this court that no objection will be taken as to the
maintainability of the relevant application for recalling the order.
4. Accordingly, O.S.A. (CAD) No.31 of 2021 is disposed of
without going into the merits thereof and by leaving the appellant free
to apply within three weeks from date for recalling the order dated
December 16, 2020 passed by the arbitration court. In the event the
relevant application is filed within the time permitted, no objection on
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
the ground of delay may be taken by any of the parties to the
proceedings.
C.M.P.Nos.10453, 10456, 10457 and 10459 of 2021 are closed.
There will be no order as to costs.
(S.B., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
26.08.2021
Index : yes/no
sra
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(sra)
O.S.A.(CAD) No.31 of 2021
26.08.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
