The jurisdiction of an arbitral Tribunal is restricted to the four corners of the agreement and to persons who are parties to the agreement.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer in C.M.A.No.1582 of 2020: Appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to set aside the impugned order passed by the Arbitrator dated 31.08.2020 passed in M.A.No.15 of 2020 in Arbitration Case No.3 of 2020.

C.M.A.No.1584 of 2020: Appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to set aside the impugned order passed by the Arbitrator dated 31.08.2020 passed in M.A.No.14 of 2020 in Arbitration Case No.3 of 2020.)

1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed challenging the interim orders passed by the sole arbitrator in M.A.No.14 of 2020 which was filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein to implead the appellants and others who have been described as respondents 5 to 12 in the application as proper, necessary and important parties to the arbitral proceedings and M.A.No.15 of 2020 which is filed for an injunction restraining the appellants and others described as respondents 5 to 12 from transferring, alienating and encumbering the schedule mentioned properties. These applications have been filed in the arbitral proceedings initiated by the respondents 3 and 4 herein in Arbitration Case No.3 of 2020.

2. The genesis for the proceedings is a Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.11.2012, hereinafter referred to as the MOU, entered into between the 1st and 2nd respondent and the 3rd respondent herein.

3. The respondents 3 and 4 herein are the claimants before the Arbitral Tribunal. The 4th respondent is the wife of the 3rd respondent and the 2nd respondent is the wife of the 1st respondent. The respondents 1, 2, 5 and 6 are respondents 1 to 4 in the claim petition. The appellants herein and respondents 7 to 12 are the proposed parties sought to be impleaded in the arbitral proceedings.

The brief facts pleaded in the Claim Statement are as follows:

4. The respondents 1 and 2 herein who were running the 6th respondent company herein had run into financial losses and their property was sought to be auctioned by the Bank. The 3rd respondent / 1st claimant who is engaged in the construction business and who was the Managing Director of the J.K. Group of Companies was approached by the respondents 1, 2 and 5 herein with a request for extending a loan to the tune of Rs.4,65,00,000/- in order to redeem the mortgage that had been created on the security of the schedule mentioned properties which belonged to the 6th respondent company. This was the primary security that had been offered by them to the Federal Bank Limited. Since, the 6th respondent had committed a default in their payment to the Bank, the Bank had exercised their rights under the SARFAESI Act and had proceeded to bring the property for auction.

5. The respondents 1, 2 and 3 had negotiated the terms of the agreement which was reduced into writing in the MOU. The terms of the MOU which are relevant for the present appeal is that the 3rd respondent herein would pay the entire sum of Rs.4,65,00,000/- to the Federal Bank and on their clearing the same, the Original documents would be handed over to him by the Bank as well as the Key to the building that has been constructed on the schedule property.

6. The 1st and 2nd respondents had also undertaken to transfer 76% of their shares in the 6th respondent company to the 3rd respondent and the remaining 24 % was to be pledged as security to the 3rd respondent. The above obligations were to be done by respondents 1 and 2 upon the 3rd respondent clearing the dues to the Bank. Thereafter, the day to day affairs of the 6th respondent was to be handled by the 3rd respondent herein. Since he was a novice, respondents 1, 2 and 5 had undertaken to provide him with the technical assistance so as to ensure that the business yields income.

7. The respondents 3 and 4 would submit that after the amounts were cleared to the Bank, the respondents 1 and 2 started creating obstacles. They had, in the first instance, written to the Bank asking the Bank to hand over the original docum