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

2007 Supreme(Del) 211

High Court Of Delhi
VIPIN SANGHI
SUBHASH CHANDER CHACHRA - Appellant
Versus
ASHWANI KUMAR CHACHRA - Respondents
OMP 4 Of 2007
Decided On : 02/01/2007

Advocates Appeared:
BHARAT SINGH, Biju Nair, DUSHYANT DAVE, H.S.Chandhoke, Manu Krishnan, Nandini Gidwaney, NEERAJ KISHAN KAUL, Rishi Jain, RITESH KUMAR, Suresh Dutt Dobhal

Headnote:Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

        Section 37 - Appeal — Challenged an interim direction passed by the Arbitral Tribunal on an application under Section 17 of the Act of respondent — Wherein appellant were directed to release an amount of Rs. 1 crore to respondent — Dispute regarding property and assets of a partnership firm — Court considered no scope of interference of an interim direction passed by the Arbitral Tribunal and Tribunal has taken a fair, reasonable and equitable view taking into account of status of capital investment & assets of the firm — Hence, Court rejected the appeal.


VIPIN SANGHI, J.

( 1 ) PRESENT is an appeal under Section 37 (2) (b) of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) directed against the order dated November 16, 2006 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal on an application i. e. IA " C/4, filed by the claimants (Respondent herein) under Section 17 of the Act. The application ia - C/4 was filed for interim relief on which the Arbitral Tribunal has issued interim directions to the appellants to release an amount of Rs. 1 crore to the respondents in four equal installments of Rs. 25,00,000/- each in four months being in the first week of December, 2006 and to pay interest to the respondents on their balance amount of capital reflected in the final amounts as on 31. 3. 2005 @ 18% per annum. The appellants herein are respondents before the arbitral Tribunal.

( 2 ) DISPUTES are essentially between two families. Appellant Subhash chander Chachra is the elder brother while the respondent Sh. Ashwani Kumar chachra is the younger brother. The brothers along with their family members were carrying on business jointly. The two families led by the two brothers consisted of the following members : 1. Mr. Subhash Chander Chachra ms. Saroj Chachra (wife)Mr. Deven Chachra (son)Ms. Yogita (daughter)They are collectively referred to herein as the Appellants 2. Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chachra ms. Madhu Chachra (wife)Ms. Ruchita (daughter)" they are collectively referred to herein as the Respondents

( 3 ) THE parties constituted three partnership firms, details whereof are as follows : firms SHARE (%)M/s. SUPERIOR CRAFTS 1. Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chachra - 50% 2. Mr. Subhash Chander Chachra - 50% m/s. SUPERIOR CRAFTS (INDIA)1. Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chachra - 55% 2. Ms. Saroj Chachra - 45% (W/o MR. Subhash Chander Chachra)M/s. SUPREME EXPORTS (INDIA)1. Ms. Madhu Chachra (W/o Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chachra) - 45% 2. Mr. Subhash Chander Chachra - 55%"

( 4 ) DISPUTES arose between the partners which lead to filing of three applications under Section 9 and 11 of the Act registered as OMP No. 262/2005, 263/2005 and 290/2005 in this Court. They were disposed of on 16th january, 2006 leading to the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. It appears that a company petition relating to M/s. Superior Crafts Private Ltd. , a family concern of the parties was also pending before the Company Law Board. On 20th february, 2006, the parties agreed to withdraw the Company Petition from the company Law Board and to raise all the disputes in that petition before the arbitral Tribunal. The Arbitral Tribunal is therefore ceased of all the disputes arising between the parties in relation to the three partnership concerns as well as their closely held company, namely, Superior Crafts Private ltd.

( 5 ) AS recorded by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal, it is not seriously disputed that differences between the parties arose sometime in 2004-05. While advancing his arguments, learned senior counsel for the appellant sh. Dushyant Dave also stated that dispute between the parties arose in July, 2005. It is also not in dispute that the appellant herein took control of the business of all the three partnership firms, namely, M/s. Superior Crafts, superior Craft (India) and M/s. Supreme Export (India) as also the company M/s. Superior Crafts Private Ltd. Resultantly since July, 2005, the respondents have not received any payments and no withdrawls were allowed to them while the appellants continued to run and manage the businesses of dealing in garments locally as well as overseas.

( 6 ) HAVING been ousted from the business, respondents preferred OMP No. 262/2005 and 263/2005 under Section 9 and 11 of the Act, while appellant no. 2 smt. Saroj Chachara, wife of appellant no. 1 herein preferred OMP No. 290/2005 in this Court. These proceedings are collectively referred to as the "earlier proceedings".

( 7 ) GRIEVANCE raised in the earlier proceedings by the respondents was that the business of the partnership firms was diverted to the company, nam































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top