Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Securitrans India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
FIS Payment Solutions And Services Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts establishing the background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding mitigation and liability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 16 , 20 , 21) |
| 3. court's analysis and interpretation of contractual obligations. (Para 32 , 44 , 66 , 88) |
| 4. the emphasis on absolute liability versus limited indemnity in contractual obligations. (Para 64 , 86) |
| 5. final conclusion affirming the arbitral award. (Para 106 , 107 , 108) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1) By this Petition filed under the provisions of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (Arbitration Act) Award of the learned Sole Arbitrator dated 3 May 2023 is sought to be invalidated. By the impugned Award, the Arbitral Tribunal has awarded sum of Rs. 25,05,79,968/- together with interest @ 18% p.a. upto 16 April 2016 in favour of the Petitioner. The Tribunal has also awarded sum of Rs. 23,26,05,022/- in favour of the Respondent. Petitioner is aggrieved by award of claim of Respondent in the sum of Rs. 23,26,05,022/- and has filed the present Petition.
Facts
2) Petitioner-Securitrans India Pvt. Ltd, (SIPL) is an incorporated entity engaged in the business of pro
The court affirmed that the absence of a contractual duty for reconciliation negated claims of mitigation, while emphasizing the absolute liability of the petitioner for theft by its employees under ....
The existence of an arbitration clause mandates dispute resolution through arbitration, and mere allegations of fraud do not preclude this process.
Appellate courts have limited grounds for interfering with arbitral awards under the Arbitration Act, primarily focused on patent illegality, evidential sufficiency, and compliance with contractual o....
Point of law: civil aspect of fraud is considered to be arbitrable in contemporary arbitration jurisprudence, with the only exception being where the allegation is that the arbitration agreement itse....
The petitioner is liable for damages due to breach of contract, regardless of inter-party settlements, requiring compensation for both lease rentals and expected profits.
A unilaterally projected profitability which is a mere assumption, cannot be the basis of assessment of damages.
Profits from trades executed on erroneously credited margin belong to the client, not the broker, as retention by the broker amounts to unjust enrichment.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
