9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 660X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in 2012, considering the present age of the appellant, this is a fit case to exercise Extra Ordinary Jurisdiction of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. It is proposed to direct the respondent to pay simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount of Rs.21,70,143/- from 27th September, 2013 which is the date of the Award of the Appellate Arbitral Tribunal. The impugned judgment is modified and it is ordered by directing that the respondent shall pay a sum of Rs.21,70,143/- to the appellant along with simple interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum with effect from 27th September, 2013 within a period of two months from today. Appeal allowed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA And HON'BLE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red forty three) to the account of the appellant. 5. Both the parties preferred petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 1996 Act ). The petition filed by the respondent was dismissed on 27th May, 2014. However, the petition filed by the appellant was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge. A modification was made in the Award by the learned Additional District Judge by directing that the appellant will be entitled to compound interest at the rate of 18% per annum with effect from 31st March, 2012 till the date of actual realization. A direction was also issued to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs) to the appellant. 6. Both the parties preferred appeals under Section 37 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the appellant read thus: As such, the Appellate Award dated 27.09.2013 stands modified to the effect that respondent Broker shall pay Rs.21,70,143/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum with annual rest w.e.f.31.03.2012 till actual realization. Also on account of illegal deed of M/s. Angel Broking Company of carrying out unauthorised tradings into their client's act and booking losses more than Rs.21 lacs therein more so when she is a widow as well as senior citizen aged 75 years, respondent Broker deserves to compensate their client for all this. As such on account of compensation as well as litigation cost, M/s. Angel Broking Company directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5 lacs to their client Ms. Sharda apart from the above. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned judgment and order. 12. The respondent has not chosen to offer an amount of Rs.21,70,143/- (Rupees twenty one lakhs seventy thousand one hundred forty three) since 9th May, 2017 till date. 13. As stated earlier, if the present appeals are to be tagged along with the referred case or these appeals are to await the decision of the reference, we do not know how many more years will be required for decision of the present appeals. 14. The fact remains that as on 9th May, 2017, the respondent was liable to pay a sum of Rs.21,70,143/- (Rupees twenty one lakhs seventy thousand one hundred forty three) which the respondent has not offered till date. In fact the liability of the respondent to pay the said amount of Rs.21,70,143/- (Rupees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
