Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Sanjeev Malhotra – Appellant
Versus
SBI Global Factors Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1) The Petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) seeking invalidation of the Arbitral Award dated 4 April 2024 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator. By the impugned Award, the Arbitral Tribunal has allowed the claims of Respondent No.1 in the sum of Rs.28,16,51,442.87/- in respect of domestic factoring facility alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. 1 April 2011. The Arbitral Tribunal has further directed Petitioner and Respondent No.2 to jointly and severally pay to Respondent No.1 amount of Rs.15,29,35,047.19/- towards reverse factoring facility alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. w.e.f. 1 April 2011. Petitioner and Respondent No.2 are further ordered and directed to specifically perform the obligations in sanction letter dated 21 June 2007. The Arbitral Tribunal has also awarded costs of arbitration in favour of Respondent No.1.
FACTS
2) Petitioner was a Director and shareholder of Respondent No.2-Company- M/s. Rayalseema Commodities Ltd., which is currently under liquidation and which used to carry on business inter alia of export, purchase, sale, distribution, stocking, dealing with, and importing
The court upheld the validity of the arbitral award, affirming the necessity for evidence of debt and reaffirming the co-extensive liability of the guarantor with that of the principal debtor, despit....
An arbitral award may be set aside if made after expiry of the arbitrator's mandate or due to undue delay impacting its validity, reflecting violations of natural justice.
Wrongful encashment of a bank guarantee can be claimed as restitution rather than strictly under damages, highlighting the sufficiency of entitlement rather than extensive evidence. This determinatio....
Scanned signed copy of the award/order of the Arbitral Tribunal to the parties would be a valid delivery as envisaged under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Excessive and unexplained delay in arbitral proceedings vitiates the award, impacting fairness and leading to its annulment under public policy and patent illegality.
An arbitration award cannot be invalidated for unilateral appointment of arbitrators if the parties had the opportunity to nominate their respective arbitrators through an independent institute, main....
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
