SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 198

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Prashant Kumar Mishra, M. Satyanarayana Murthy, JJ.
VR Commodities Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Norvic Shipping Asia Pte. Ltd. - Respondent
ICOMAA No.01 of 2022
Decided On : 05-05-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sanjay Suraneni representing Avanija Inuganti, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Amitava Majumdar, Advocate.

Point of Law: The principle of separability, clause pertaining to settlement of disputes by Arbitration contained in substantive agreement can be taken into consideration even to decide an application under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act leaving it open to Arbitration Tribunal to record a finding, if any, on clause, its admissibility due to failure to pay stamp duty on substantive document.

Headnote:

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 9 and 37 - Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Section 35 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 - Arbitration Clause - Order of interim injunction - Stamp duty - Appealable orders - Alleged that petitioner (respondent herein) is a company incorporated under Companies Act, carrying on shipping business known as “Norvic Shipping Asia Pte. Limited, whereas respondent (appellant herein) is another company carrying on its business in the name and style of “VR Commodities Private Limited - Petitioner and respondent entered into fixture note, Charter party and settlement agreement for transportation of coal from “Muara Bunyuasi to “Tuticorin and “New Mangalore, India – The arbitration agreement is not included as an instrument chargeable to Stamp duty. Therefore, due to the doctrine of separability, the arbitration clause will exist independently and would not be rendered invalid on account of non-payment of stamp duty as the same is not chargeable to it. (Para 53)

Finding of the Court: The clause pertaining to settlement of disputes by Arbitration contained in substantive agreement can be taken into consideration even to decide an application under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act leaving it open to Arbitration Tribunal to record a finding, if any, on clause, its admissibility due to failure to pay stamp duty on substantive document - It is difficult to uphold contention of learned counsel for appellant since same was turned down by Full Bench indirectly while referring matter to Constitution Bench- In view of our foregoing discussion, court find no merits in contention of learned counsel for appellant-respondent, hence the order under challenge cannot be interfered on the ground that substantive agreement is not stamped.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 28.01.2022 passed in ICOMAOA No.11 of 2021 by the learned single Judge, the present appeal is preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

2. The parties to the appeal will hereinafter be referred as arrayed before the learned single Judge for the sake of convenience and to avoid confusion.

3. The petitioner (respondent herein) before the learned single Judge, filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the following reliefs:

    (a) pass an order of interim injunction in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent, restraining the respondent, from directly or indirectly through its nominees, agents, associates, affiliates, representatives or employees, in any manner, acquiring, selling, encumbering, alienating, transferring, issuing delivery orders getting possession or otherwise dealing with the cargo of 7,600 MTs out of the 32,770 MTs of coal discharged by the Vessel MV Port Tokyo and currently lying at the V.O. Chidambaranar Port at Tuticorin in the month of August 2021, till the disposal of the present petition;

(b) pass an order appointing a Receiver/Court Commissioner to take custody of the cargo of 7,600 MTs of coal currently lying at the V.O Chidambaranar Port at Tuticorin discharged from the vessel MV Port Tokyo;

(c) pass an order directing the respondent to offer security in the form of cash security or other security as this Hon‘ble Court deems fit for a sum of INR 4,86,97,180.40 ps. equivalent to USD 646,486.11 being the sum total of the principal claim of USD 566,486.11 in lieu of admitted pending dues of demurrage payable to the Petitioner and USD 80,000 towards legal costs.

(d) Pass an order directing the Respondent to bear all costs, charges, expenses, levies, of any kind whatsoever which may be incurred by the petitioner in exercise of its lien over the cargo of 7,600 MTs of coal, including storage and maintenance costs.

(e) pass an order permitting the Petitioner to sell the liened cargo of 7,600 MTs of coal in the event of non-payment of sums to the petitioner as set out in prayer clauses (c) above;

(f) for ad interim reliefs in terms of prayer (a) (b) (c) and (d) above.

4. It is alleged that the petitioner (respondent herein) is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, carrying on shipping business known as “Norvic Shipping Asia Pte. Limited, whereas the respondent (appellant herein) is another company carrying on its business in the name and style of “VR Commodities Private Limited. The petitioner and respondent entered into fixture note dated 16.07.2021, Charterparty dated 29.05.2021 and settlement agreement dated 06.09.2021 for transportation of coal from “Muara Bunyuasi to “Tuticorin and “New Mangalore, India. But there is a breach of agreement of Charter party allegedly and the petitioner sustained loss due to default of certain terms under the charterparty agreement, requiring the petitioner to have arbitral proceedings. To make good for the amount possibly to recover from the respondent, the petitioner sought various interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

5. Learned single Judge ordered ad-interim injunction on 22.10.2021 in favour of the petitioner against the respondent restraining the respondent, from directly or indirectly through its nominees, agents, associates, affiliates, representatives or employees, in any manner, acquiring, selling, encumbering, alienating, transferring, issuing delivery orders, getting possession or otherwise dealing with the cargo of 7,600 MTs out of the 32,770 MTs of coal discharged by the vessel MV Port Tokyo, which is currently lying at V.O.Chidambaranar Port at Tuticorin, in the event of the respondent failing to furnish security for US $ 646,500/- within 48 hours of service of notice as well as this order on the respondent.

6. After passing order dated 22.10.2021, final order dated 28.01.2022 w

                          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                          1
                          2
                          3
                          4
                          5
                          6
                          7
                          8
                          9
                          10
                          11
                          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                          supreme today icon
                          logo-black

                          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                          Please visit our Training & Support
                          Center or Contact Us for assistance

                          qr

                          Scan Me!

                          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                          whatsapp-icon Back to top