9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 701X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt has erroneously formed an opinion that part of the award was beyond the jurisdiction of the arbitrators. - CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3365-66 OF 2002 - - - Dated:- 7-5-2002 - R.C. LAHOTI AND B.N. AGRAWAL, JJ. R.F. Nariman, R.N. Dhorde, P.R. Malpani, S.K. Verma and Shivaji M. Jadhav for the Appellant. P.M. Amin, Ketan Parikh, Atul Desai, Pratap Venugopal, P.S. Sudhir and K.J. John for the Respondent. JUDGMENT R.C. Lahoti, J. - Leave granted in both petitions. 2. The appellant is a co-operative sugar factory manufacturing sugar from sugarcane. On 17-11-1992, an agreement was entered into between the appellant and the respondent for design, manufacture, procurement and supply of machinery and equipments for modernis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udge has dismissed the civil revision and allowed the appeal. As a result the order of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division remitting the award to the arbitrators has been set aside and the award to the extent of Rs. 107.54 lakhs and the interest thereon in the sum of Rs. 28.74 lakhs has been set aside. The rest of the award has been made a rule of the Court. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the High Court these petitions have been filed by the appellants seeking leave to file appeals by special leave. 4. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties at length who have apart from making legal submissions carried the Court through the pleadings, the relevant correspondence between the parties, several documents and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rbitrators as the arbitrators could not assume jurisdiction over an issue which was not referred to them. 6. On 19-10-1994, the appellant served a notice on the respondent setting out several disputes arising between the parties. One of the disputes raised therein reads as under : "Till today, we have sent Rs. 107.54 lakhs on the said plant, which it is abundantly clear that will not give required results as agreed not even optimum to the norms laid down by the excise rules. Therefore, Rs. 107.54 lakhs will be straight way loss to my client and there will be also loss of interest at the rate of 18% per year from 1st May, 1993 onwards. In the circumstances my clients have instructed me to call upon you which I hereby do to reimburse th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itrators. We find that the claim for Rs. 107.54 lakhs and the interest thereon raised by the appellant against the respondent was very much before the arbitrators and the parties also proceeded on the assumption that this dispute was before the arbitrators and liable to be adjudicated upon by them. Issue Nos. 10, 11 and 12 framed by the arbitrators are : "(10)Does the claimant prove that it spent Rs. 107.54 lakhs on the plant and the plant has gone waste for not getting the guaranteed performance ? (11)Is the claimant entitled to Rs. 107.54 lakhs as actual damages ? (12)Is the claimant entitled to Rs. 45.46 lakhs as interest on the said amount of Rs. 107.54 lakhs ?" The issues are widely worded and include within their sweep the dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the arbitrators. We find it difficult to sustain the finding of the High Court that the arbitrators had determined an issue which was beyond the scope of reference to the arbitration. The disputes did arise out of contract between the parties and the arbitrators were seized of the disputes within the scope of reference to them. The parties have also joined in the contest before the arbitrators having understood the scope of controversy, as already stated hereinabove. 9. Clause ( c ) of sub-section (1) of section 16 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 contemplates an award being remitted to the arbitrators or umpire for reconsideration upon such terms as the Court thinks fit where an objection to the legality of the award is apparent upon t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
