9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Retd.). Therefore, it is apparent that respondent is not agreeing on the name of arbitrator proposed by the applicant. In view of the aforesaid, exercising the power as per Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in the opinion of this Court, Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Naik (Retd.) may be appointed as arbitrator to resolve the dispute on a fees as specified in the Schedule which shall be borne by both the parties equally. The Registry of this Court may take appropriate step seeking consent of the arbitrator and place the same on record. In view of the foregoing, this application is hereby allowed and Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Naik (Retd.) is appointed as arbitrator. - A.C. No. 18/2015 - - - Dated:- 1-12-2016 - J. K. Maheshwari, J. For the Applicant : Shri Vijay Kumar Asudani, Learned Counsel For the Respondent : Sajal Tiwari, Learned Counsel ORDER This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the applicant seeking appointment of independent arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes arisen between the applicant and respondents. 2. The facts in brief are that the applicant is a private l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply is not filed, his right to file reply shall be closed and it was ordered to be listed for today. On 23.11.2016, reply has been filed on behalf of respondent no.1 only and not for Chairman and Managing Director (respondent nos.2 and 3 herein) without filing any affidavit in support thereto. In the reply, the aforesaid two conditions have been elaborated and document Annexure A/1 i.e. reference of registration as made in the reply to notice dated 3.10.2013 under the provisions of SICA Act has been filed. In view of the aforesaid facts, it is apparent that despite ample opportunities, reply has not been filed by respondent nos.1 to 3, though, they are served and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 was granted time as prayed on various dates. Looking to the last ordersheet, the right to file reply is hereby closed, however, this Court has proceeded to decide the case as per the material brought on record. 5. After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties and on perusal of the facts of this case, the dispute is on account of non-payment of monthly rent of ₹ 50,000/- which was fixed as per the agreement for use of transformer install ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rties of the industrial company or for the appointment of a receiver in respect thereof and no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect of any loans or advance granted to the industrial company shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority. 7. Hon ble Apex Court in the case of San-A Tradubg Co. Ltd. vs. I.C. Textiles Ltd. decided on 28.4.2006 has considered the same and held as under :- Similarly, in Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. vs. Church of South India, AIR 1992 SC 1439, this Court explained the words or the like as follows : The words or the like have to be construed with reference to the preceding words, namely for execution , distress which means that the proceedings which are contemplated in this category are proceedings whereby recovery of dues is sought to be made by way of execution, distress or similar proceedings against the property of the Company. It is, thus, apparent from the wording of Section 22(1) and the above decisions of this Court that the proceedings covered under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the word suit , it is difficult to accede to the submission of the appellants that the word suit in Section 22(1) of SICA means anything other than some form of curial process and the Court found it difficult to widen the scope of the word suit so as to cover proceedings against the guarantor of an industrial company. By virtue of amendment to Section 22 of SICA, no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect of any loans or advances granted to the industrial company, shall lie and adjudication is prohibited of the liability of the industrial company or the guarantor. Section 22 further prohibits taking up of the proceedings of the nature which would be coercive for recovery of money against a sick undertaking. Proceeding in arbitration is neither a suit under sub-section (1) of Section 22 of SICA nor the proceedings thereunder and, therefore, there is no prohibition under Section 22 of SICA to take up the arbitration proceedings to adjudicate the liability of the parties to the arbitration proceedings. In my view, Section 22 of SICA does not debar the arbitration proceedings under the Ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
