JUDGMENT :

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

By these two petitions filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Arbitration Act"), the petitioner has impugned the arbitral award dated 14th December 2015 along with partial final award dated 5th June 2015 passed by the learned arbitrator allowing some of the claims made by the respondent. By consent of parties, both these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. The petitioner was the original respondent whereas the respondent was the original claimant before the learned arbitrator. In this judgment, the parties are described as per their original status in the arbitration proceedings. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these arbitration petitions are as under :-

3. The respondent was engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of garments, leather accessories and other related products. It was the case of the claimant that the claimant was entitled to shop nos.1 and 2, Linking Road, Khar (West), Mumbai- 400 056 and another shop at Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai -400 013. By an Agreement entitled 'Agency Agreement' dated 20th May 2008, the respondent appointed the claimant as authorised agent of its products at Khar premises to establish and operate a Retail outlet and showroom in the said premises. The said agreement was for the term of 60 months ending on 20th May 2013 on the terms and conditions recorded therein. (Hereinafter referred to as 'Khar Premises').

4. On 7th June 2008, the parties entered into another Agency Agreement in respect of Lower Parel Premises. The respondent appointed the claimant as an authorised agent of its products to establish and operate a Retail outlet and showroom from the said Lower Parel Shop.

5. Under clause 4 of the said Khar Shop Agency Agreement, it was provided that there would be a lock in period till 30th November 2011. The tenure of the said agreement would be 60 months ending on 20th May 2013 or if earlier determined as provided by the said agreement. The respondent agreed to pay the claimant a Minimum Guarantee of Rs.16,65,000/- or 15% on net sales whichever is higher in respect of the Retail outlet within 12 days of the succeeding month subject to all statutory deductions. Under clause 5 of the said agreement, it was provided that any outstanding due to any reason shall amount to breach of trust and shall attract interest @24% p.a. Under clause 8 of the Agreement, it was provided that the said agreement will be renewed further for 5 years with the same terms and conditions if the authorised Agent is able to renew with its landlord.

6. Under clause 8, the claimant agreed to give an undertaking in writing to the respondent for the next 5 years that if the respondent breaks the agreement during the initial 43 months lock in period, the respondent would be liable to pay Minimum Guarantee Commission for the remaining period of the Agreement. But after the 60 months, it is only with the respondent to continue or not based on the profitability.

7. The respondent would also provide interest free refundable security deposit of Rs.84,00,000/- against its obligations to make up the assured minimum guarantee for 6 months in case of termination of the Agency Agreement by the respondent during the period of the Agreement. Clause 12 of the said agreement provided for the arbitration agreement for referring the disputes and differences between the parties to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act or any statutory modification of substitution thereof. Subject to aforesaid, the parties submitted to the exclusive jurisdiction of Courts at Mumbai.

8. It is the case of the claimant that the respondent paid the net amount to the claimant in accordance with the provisions of the said Khar Shop Agency Agreement for the period upto October 2008. The respondent by letter dated 4th November 2008, requested the