O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 & 15 of 2020 dismissed. The award dated 13.09.2019 passed by the Sole Arbitrator is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. 08.05.2020 Lbm Index : Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order P.T.ASHA, J.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 13.02.2020
Delivered on : 08.05.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 and 15 of 2020
O.P.No.955 of 2019:
M/s.Suryadev Alloys and Power Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,
Mr. Govind Gagoria,
Having registered office at
No.497, Poonamallee High Road,
Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. … Petitioner
Vs.
M/s. Shri Govindaraja Textiles Pvt. Ltd.
Rep. by its Director,
Having registered office at
No.258, Tiruchuli Road,
Aruppukottai,
Virudhunagar District – 626 101. …
respondent
O.P.No.15 of 2020:
1/27
[5/25, 16:40] Sekarreporter 1: O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 & 15 of 2020
Arbitrator Mr. Justice R.S. Ramanathan and consequently direct the
respondent to pay a sum of Rs.13,80,864/- to the petitioner herein together
with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of counter claim to
the award amount of Rs.1,49,95,039/- from 17.06.2016 till the date of award.
For Petitioner : Mr.Sharath Chander
(For Mr.P. Krishnan)
For Respondent : Mr.P.Rajagopal
(In O.P. No.955 of 2019)
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajagopal
For Respondent : Mr.Sharath Chander
For Mr.P. Krishnan
(In O.P. No.15 of 2020)
C O M M O N O R D E R
The question that arises for consideration in this petition is the
validity of the Award passed a year, after the period fixed by Court had
lapsed. O.P. No.955 of 2019 has been filed by the claimant challenging the
award in as much as the Arbitrator had failed to award pendente lite interest
and O.P. No.15 of 2020 is filed by the respondent challenging the same award
primarily on the ground that the award had been passed after the mandate of
3/27
[5/25, 16:41] Sekarreporter 1: O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 & 15 of 2020
receipt of the order copy, sittings had been held and the matter reserved for
orders on 09.02.2019 which presupposes that the order of this Court had been
received much before 09.02.2019.
The Judgment of the Learned Single Judge of the Delhi High
Court in “M/s.Chandok Machineries Vs. S.N. Sunderson & Co.” as stated
supra was a case where the majority of the Arbitrators had signed the award
well within the time extended for making of the award and it was only one of
the Three who had signed it thereafter. However, I beg to disagree with the
observation of the Learned Judge that the provisions of Section 29A(4) of the
1996, Act empowers the Court to extend the time even after the making the
award. Unlike, the language of Section 28(1) of the 1940 Act which expressly
empowers the Court to extend the time even after the award has been made, a
similar power has not been incorporated in Section 29A of the 1996 Act.
On a conspectus of the above discussion, it is clear that the award
has been made after the termination of the mandate of the Learned Arbitrator.
Consequently, O.P.No.15 of 2020 is allowed and O.P.No.955 of 2019 is
25/27
[5/25, 16:41] Sekarreporter 1: O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 & 15 of 2020
dismissed. The award dated 13.09.2019 passed by the Sole Arbitrator is set
aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
08.05.2020
Lbm
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order/non-speaking order
P.T.ASHA, J.,
Lbm
O.P.Nos.955 of 2019 and 15 of 2020
26/27
