IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Ozone Projects Private Ltd., T.Nagar, Chennai - Petitioner
Versus
Chennaiyin FC Sports Private Ltd., Mumbai - Respondent
Original Petition No. 292 of 2018 & Application Nos. 2790 & 6220 of 2018
Decided On : 18-06-2019
Arbitration and Conciliation Act - Challenge to Award - Sections 34, 51, 52
Fact of the Case:
Dispute between claimant and respondent regarding non-compliance with sponsorship agreement. Claimant sought outstanding sponsorship fee, interest, and compensation. Respondent alleged non-performance of obligations by claimant and counterclaimed for damages.
Finding of the Court:
Arbitrator found claimant's non-compliance but also respondent's admission of liability for a specific amount. Court upheld the arbitrator's decision, stating that the admission was binding on the parties and the award could only be interfered with under specific circumstances.
Issues: Dispute over non-compliance with sponsorship agreement, admission of liability, and applicability of Sections 34, 51, 52 of the Contract Act.
Ratio Decidendi: Arbitrator's decision upheld based on respondent's clear admission of liability, which was found to be binding. Court emphasized limited grounds for interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Final Decision: Original Petition dismissed, connected applications closed, and no costs awarded.
(Prayer: This Original Petition has been filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to set aside the Award passed by the Arbitrator on 19.02.2018.)
1. Challenge has been made against the impugned Award passed by the Sole Arbitrator appointed by the parties dated 19.02.2018.
2. Brief facts leading to filing of this Original Petition is as follows:
The claimant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act 2013 and owner of franchisee Chennaiyin F.C., herein after called as CFC. The respondent is engaged in the business of real estate development. The claimant has the sole and absolute right to grant sponsorship rights of CFC on the terms as may be deemed fit by them. The claimant signed a Letter of Intent with the respondent on 07.10.2014. According to which, the respondent was designated as Principal Sponsor for CFC for the period from 01.09.2015 to 31.08.2017 or commencement of the second season, whichever is earlier and the Sponsorship Fee payable by the respondent was fixed at Rs.6,00,00,000/-. Subsequently, on 05.09.2015 a Sponsorship Agreement was executed between the Claimant and the Respondent. As per the said Sponsorship Agreement, the term of the sponsorship was fixed from 01.09.2015 to 31.08.2017 and the amount was fixed at Rs.17,00,00,000/- payable by the respondent to the claimant as set out in Schedule 2 of the agreement. Though the claimant complied with the obligations under the agreement, the respondent failed and neglected to comply with its obligations under the Letter of Intent and the Agreement. The respondent had failed in making payments to the claimant towards the Sponsorship Fee and also towards the fee for the Grass Root Development Plan. As the respondent neither made the payment nor confirmed the renewal of the Sponsorship Agreement for 2016-17 season i.e., ISL Season 3, the Claimant made requests to the Respondent regarding the same by sending E-mails. In the E-mail dated 26.08.2016, it is stated that they were willing to renew the sponsorship for the ISL Season 3 on a lesser consideration. They sought time to clear the outstanding dues payable to the Claimant. As there was no co-operation from the respondent, the Claimant issued a notice dated 07.04.2016 demanding the outstanding amount. Thereafter, the claimant issued notice dated 30.09.2016, terminating Agreement and invoked the Arbitration Clause in the Agreement. The respondent vide letter dated 12.10.206, had also agreed to appoint sole Arbitrator. On the basis of the above, Claimant made the following claims:
1. Rs.3,58,43,447/- towards the outstanding sponsorship fee
2. Rs.63,13,110/- towards Grass Roots Development Plan
3. Rs.2,00,000/- towards early termination of the Agreement
4. Interest at 18% from the date the payment become due till Realization.
5. Compensation for the Claimant for loss of Business Opportunities to the Claimant
6. Costs.
3. It is the case of the respondent that the claimant has failed to perform its obligations as per the terms of the Agreement and caused loss and hardship to the respondent. As the Claimant Club was owned and backed by reputed and well known personalities from the Sports and Entertainment fields, the respondent entered into negotiations with the Claimant regarding Sponsorship of the Claimant Club with a view to get maximum publicity and promotion for the Sports as well as maximum exposure for the respondent’s brand in the market. After numerous representations and assurances made by the Claimant, the letter of intent dated 07.10.2014 was issued by the respondent. But the Claimant did not honor the assurances and the representations, after the letter of intent. The main reason to agree to part with huge money under the Agreement was due to the assurance that the team owners Mr.M.S.Dhoni and Mr.Abishek Bachan would be available for “meet and greet” atleast twice in every season. But even after completion of two seasons, the ‘meet and greet’ events failed to materialize. The failu
Puravankara Projects Limited v. Mrs.Ranjani Venkatraman Ganesh and Another
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.