9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d disposal of this appeal. - Civil Apperal No. 4628 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.31356 of 2016] - - - Dated:- 1-5-2018 - Mr. R.K. Agrawal And Mr. Abhay Manohar Sapre JJ. For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG, Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR, Mr. V.S.Robin,Adv., Mr. Srijan Sinha,Adv., Mr. Biju P.Raman,Adv. And Mr. Vishnu Sharma,Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Ameet Naik,Adv., Mr. Rishi Agrawala,Adv., Mr. Harshwardan Jha,Adv., Mr. Abhishek Kale,Adv., Mr. Karan Luthra,Adv., Ms. Devika Mohan,Adv., Ms. Nlyati Kohli,Adv. And Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1) Leave granted. 2) This appeal arises from the final judgment and order dated 27.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Single Judge by order dated 09.07.2015 upheld the respondent's preliminary objection and held that keeping in view the terms of the agreement in question coupled with the law laid down by this Court in several decisions governing the issues arising in the case, Indian Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the Act to question the legality and correctness of the award in question and accordingly dismissed the appellant's application as being not maintainable in Indian Courts. 8) Since the appellant's application was dismissed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the Indian Courts, the Single Judge did not consider it necessary to decide the issues arising in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he subject and the issues arising in this case and made sincere attempt to either distinguish or/and place reliance on them to show how and why these decisions apply to the facts of the case at hand or how and why they do not apply. 16) Learned counsel for the parties mainly cited these cases: Foreign Cases : Naviera Amazonica Peruana S.A. vs. Compania Internacional De Seguros Del Peru (1988) (1) Lloyd's Law Reports 116, Hiscox vs. Outhwaite (1992) 1 AC 562, Union of India vs. McDonnell Douglas Corpn. (1993) 2 Lloyd s Law Rep. 48, C vs. D (2007) EWCA Civ 1282 (CA), C vs. D (2008) 1 Lloyd s Law Rep 239, Braes of Doune Wind Farm (Scotland) Limited vs. Alfred McAlpine Business Services Limited (2008) EWHC 426 (TCC), Sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 603, Harmony Innovation Shipping Ltd. vs. Gupta Coal India Ltd. Anr., (2015) 9 SCC 172, Union of India vs. Reliance Industries and Ors. (2015) 10 SCC 213, Bharat Aluminum Company vs. Kaiser Aluminum Technical Services INC (2016) 4 SCC 126, Eitzen Bulk A/S Ors. vs. Ashapur Minechem Ltd. Anr. (2016) 11 SCC 508, Imax Corporation vs E-City Entertainment(India) Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 5 SCC 331, Roger Shashoua and Ors. vs. Mukesh Sharma Ors., 2017 (14) SCC 722. 17) The argument of both the learned senior counsel mainly centered around to one question which, in our opinion, does arise in the appeal, namely, when the arbitration agreement specify the venue for holding the arbitration sittings by the arbitrators but does not specif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that while approving the ratio of Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd. (supra) these two factors which have some relevance on its efficacy do not seem to have been examined in the case of Bharat Aluminum Company (supra) . 22) Dr. Singhvi also urged that what is the effect of UNCITRAL Model Law, when they are made part of the arbitration agreement for deciding the question of seat has also not been so far decided in any of the earlier decisions. 23) In our opinion, though, the question regarding the seat and venue for holding arbitration proceedings by the arbitrators arising under the Arbitration Agreement/International Commercial Arbitration Agreement is primarily required to be decided keeping in view the terms of the arbitratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
