Karnataka HC dismisses Writ Petition filed with delay seeking Termination of Arbitration Proceedings with Costs of 25,000/- [Read Order]
Karnataka HC dismisses writ petition filed with delay seeking termination of arbitral proceedings with costs of Rs 25,000/- payable to the ‘Karnataka State Legal Services Authority’
Karnataka HC – Writ Petition – Termination – Arbitration Proceedings – taxscan
Karnataka HC – Writ Petition – Termination – Arbitration Proceedings – taxscan
The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition filed with a delay seeking termination of arbitral proceedings with costs of Rs 25,000/-.
The petitioner filed three memos before the Arbitral Tribunal stating that the Tribunal has no mandate in view of Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hence prayed to terminate the proceedings. Permitting the respondents to file objection to the said memos. Challenging the said proceedings the petitioner is before the Court in the present writ petition.
The Arbitral Tribunal subsequently rejected the above three memos holding that the parties completed filing of their pleadings in the Arbitral Proceedings and twelve months would commence from the said date. Further, it observed that period of stay of proceedings requires to be excluded.
The senior counsel or the petitioner contended that Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and the Evidence Act, 1872 are not applicable to arbitral proceedings and its provisions are excluded to the proceedings under the 1996 Act. Since the proceedings before the Arbitral Tribunal got terminated by lapse of time, the Arbitral Tribunal could not have proceeded further and could not have directed the petitioner to be present for further proceedings. Thus, it is prayed for allowing the writ petition.
The senior counsel for the respondent submitted that no writ petition would be maintainable challenging interim orders of the Arbitral Tribunal and the same could be challenged only in Section 34 proceedings. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of SBP & Co., vs. Patel Engineering Ltd and Another.
A Division Bench of Justices GS Pandit and CM Poonacha observed that “The period occupied by the order of stay made by a Court shall be excluded. In the instant case also, the period during which the proceedings before the Arbitral Tribunal was stayed shall have to be excluded for calculating or determining twelve months period for making award in terms of Section 29A(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.”
“From the order sheet of the Arbitral proceedings, it is seen that the petitioner who is respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal, took more than three to four adjournments to file its objection statement and also to file counterclaim. Thereafter, it took several adjournments and also sought extension of time to file surrejoinder. For the reasons recorded above and in the above circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dismiss the present writ petition with costs of Rs.25,000/-, payable to the ‘Karnataka State Legal Services Authority’. The above cost shall be paid within two weeks from today and shall produce receipt for having paid before the Arbitral Tribunal” the Court noted.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
