Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1993

N.SATHISH KUMAR
Landmark Housing Projects Chennai Pvt. Ltd. , Represented by its Managing Director, T. Udayakumar – Appellant
Versus
Savithri Naidu – Respondent

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties :V. Lakshminararyanan, M/s. M.A. Gowthamani, Nithyaesh Nataraj, Nithyaesh, Vaibav, Arun Anbumni, M/s. Arulselvam Associates, Advocates

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The court discusses arbitrability and confirms the award does not require interference, dismissing petitions challenging it. (!) (!) (!) - The award against the 1st Respondent includes specific sums, interest, attachment, and injunction, with others dismissed. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The court addresses whether cash transactions and alleged illegal purposes affect enforceability, concluding no perversity in the arbitral findings and that the contract is not void ab initio. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)

What is the scope of arbitrability and whether the arbitral award can be upheld despite challenges to arbitrability?

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer in O.P.No.546 of 2020: Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to set aside the Award No.1 of 2018 dated 14.09.2020 on the file of the Arbitral Tribunal, as being illegal and opposed to public policy.

Arb.O.P.(Comm)No.87 of 2021: Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,to set aside the paragraphs 233(e), 233(f), 233(h), practically set aside in paragraphs 233(a) and 233(b) of the Arbitral Award dated23.12.2015, and enhance the rate of interest from 9% to 24% till the date of realization.)

1. Two Original Petitions are filed Challenging the Arbitral Award passed by the learned sole Arbitrator dated 14.09.2020.

1.a. O.P.No.546 of 2020 has been filed by the 1st Respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal to set aside the Award No.1 of 2018 dated 14.09.2020 on the file of the Arbitral Tribunal, as being illegal and opposed to public policy.

1.b. O.P.No.87 of 2021 has been filed by the Claimants before the Arbitral Tribunal to set aside the Award and dismiss the claim petition preferred by the Claimant.

1.c The parties are arrayed as per their own rankings before the Arbitral Tribunal. The Petitioner w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1993

N.SATHISH KUMARLandmark Housing Projects Chennai Pvt. Ltd. , Represented by its Managing Director, T. Udayakumar – AppellantVersusSavithri Naidu – Respondent

What is the scope of arbitrability and whether the arbitral award can be upheld despite challenges to arbitrability?

Cases Referred (22)

N.SATHISH KUMAR
Landmark Housing Projects Chennai Pvt. Ltd. , Represented by its Managing Director, T. Udayakumar – Appellant
Versus
Savithri Naidu – Respondent