9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred the matter to retired judge of the High Court for arbitration. It is not disputed that the Arbitrator gave an Award and the same was remitted to the Commission. The Commission, in terms of the Award decided the complaint of the respondent. Aggrieved, the appellants have preferred this appeal. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that this case stand covered by a decision of this Court in Skypak Couriers Ltd. Vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd. reported in 2000(5) SCC 294, wherein it was held that the complaint filed under Section 22 of the Consumer Protection Act requires the Commission to decide the matter in accordance with the evidence, documents and the respective case of the parties including the submission made before it and not by referring the matter to an Arbitrator by giving an Award. In view of the said decision, this appeal deserves to be allowed. Consequently, the judgment under challenge is set aside. The appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. We may clarify that it will be open to the respondent to enforce the Award under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Any amount deposited by the appellants sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the arbitrator after enforcement of the 1996 Act, the 1996 Act shall apply. On an appeal preferred by the Appellants herein before the Division Bench, the impugned order was passed. Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants, has raised a short question in support of this appeal. The learned counsel would contend that keeping in view of the fact that the dispute was referred to the arbitrator by an order dated 19.5.1995 having regard to Section 21 of the 1996 Act, the provisions of the 1940 Act would apply. Strong reliance in this behalf has been placed on Milkfood Ltd. Vs. GMC Ice Cream (P) Ltd. [(2004) 7 SCC 288]. Mr. S.V. Deshpande, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent, on the other hand, would contend that the 1996 Act having come into force on 22nd August, 1996 and the award sought to be questioned having been passed on 19th August, 1996, the 1996 Act shall apply. The learned counsel in support of the said contention relied upon on the decisions of this Court in Thyssen Stahlunion GMBH Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. [(1999) 9 SCC 334] and Furest Day Lawson Ltd. Vs. Jindal Exports Ltd. [(2001) 6 SCC 356]. The learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication was filed by the Appellants herein being I.A. No. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 1920 of 1997 but the same was not necessary to do as the parties were at liberty to raise the said question before the High Court. A court of law has no jurisdiction to direct a matter to be governed by one statute when provisions of another statute are applicable. This Court merely directed the parties to enforce the said award which would mean that the same should be enforced in accordance with law. If a party to the lis has a right to question an award in terms of the 1940 Act, no court has the requisite jurisdiction to deprive him therefrom. The decisions of this Court in Thyssen Stahlunion GMBH (supra) and Furest Day Lawson Ltd. (supra) whereupon Mr. Deshpande relied upon were considered by a 3-Judge Bench of this Court in Milkfood Ltd. (supra). This Court upon taking into consideration a large number of decisions observed: "45. "Commencement of an arbitration proceeding" and "commencement of a proceeding before an arbitrator" are two different expressions and carry different meanings. 46. A notice of arbitration or the commencement of an arbitration may not bear the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mencement of arbitral proceedings for the purpose of the 1996 Act wherefor also necessity of reference to Section 21 would arise. The court is to interpret the repeal and savings clauses in such a manner so as to give a pragmatic and purposive meaning thereto. It is one thing to say that commencement of arbitration proceedings is dependent upon the facts of each case as that would be subject to the agreement between the parties. It is also another thing to say that the expression "commencement of arbitration proceedings" must be understood having regard to the context in which the same is used; but it would be a totally different thing to say that the arbitration proceedings commence only for the purpose of limitation upon issuance of a notice and for no other purpose. The statute does not say so. Even the case-laws do not suggest the same. On the contrary, the decisions of this Court operating in the field beginning from Shetty's Constructions are ad idem to the effect that Section 21 must be taken recourse to for the purpose of interpretation of Section 85(2)(a) of the Act. There is no reason, even if two views are possible, to make a departure from the decisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
