IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
P. Bala - Appellant
Versus
Search Light Production by its Propreitor, Rajiv Babbar & Another - Respondent
O.P. No. 966 of 2017
Decided On : 25-01-2022
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Arbitration Agreement – Arbitral Award – Challenged - Petitioner claims to be a reputed Film Director. The first respondent is a producer of Feature Films. Under an agreement petitioner was appointed by first respondent as a Director for production of a Feature Film to be commenced in first half of 2009. Under terms and conditions of agreement, first respondent agreed to pay an advance amount to petitioner. The details of payments and other terms are reflected in the agreement signed between parties – Held, Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act as Arbitral Tribunal has rightly applied terms and conditions of agreement and there is no misapplication of clauses contained therein as alleged by petitioner - Contract unworkable due to high financial budget, which was not expected, first respondent (Producer) chose to withdraw from contract. The withdrawal from contract by first respondent is not opposed to public policy as any prudent businessman will do same in similar circumstances. The Arbitrator has rightly rejected the contention of the petitioner - Original Petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Prayer: Original Petition filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking a) to set aside the Award dated 28.08.2017 passed in favour of the 1st respondent; b) to direct the 1st respondent to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 3,31,30,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum; and c) to direct the 1st respondent to pay the petitioner the costs of this petition.
1. This petition has been filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging the Arbitral Award dated 28.08.2017 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal against the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to pay the respondent a sum of Rs.1,12,77,772/- together with interest @ 18% per annum from 27.04.2009 till the date of Arbitral Award and interest at the same rate from the date of the Arbitral Award till the date of realisation.
2. The petitioner claims to be a reputed Film Director. The first respondent is a producer of Feature Films. Under an agreement dated 31.07.2008, the petitioner was appointed by the first respondent as a Director for the production of a Feature Film to be commenced in the first half of 2009. Under the terms and conditions of the agreement, the first respondent agreed to pay an advance of Rs.1,12,77,772/- to the petitioner. The details of the payments and other terms are reflected in the agreement signed between the parties. Since the first respondent withdrew from the contract by exercising its power under clause 10 of the agreement dated 31.07.2008, they sought for refund of a sum of Rs.1,12,77,772/- paid to the petitioner as according to the first respondent, even before the production of Feature Film could commence, the contract has been withdrawn by the first respondent on the ground that the film project was not workable due to increase in the financial budget and other financial implications. Since the petitioner failed to refund the advance amount of Rs.1,12,77,772/-, the first respondent initiated arbitration in accordance with arbitration agreement and a sole Arbitrator was appointed by this Court on 11.09.2014 under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in O.P.No.615 of 2011. The Sole Arbitrator appointed by this Court acted upon the arbitral reference and after hearing both the parties and based on the pleadings and evidence available on record, has passed the impugned arbitral award dated 28.08.2017 referred to supra. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
3. Heard Mr.V.Ayyadurai, learned senior counsel representing Mr.N.Velmurugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Madhu Preetha Elango, learned counsel representing Mr.R.Parthasarathy, learned counsel for the first respondent.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner has received a sum of Rs.1,12,77,772/- from the first respondent as per the agreement dated 31.07.2008 for directing the Feature Film to be produced by the first respondent. As per the agreement, the first respondent had agreed to utilise the petitioner’s services as a Director for the production of a Feature Film to be commenced in the first half of 2009. Under clause 10 of the agreement, the first respondent being a production company, if it does not intend to commence/continue the production of the Feature Film for whatsoever reason can seek for refund of advance amount from the petitioner and the petitioner on receipt of the letter of communication in writing from the first respondent shall refund within a period of two weeks from the date of letter of communication in writing from the first respondent. The receipt of a sum of Rs.1,12,77,772/- from the first respondent is acknowledged by the petitioner as seen from the documents filed along with the typed set of papers as well as from his statement of defence which was filed before the learned Arbitrator.
5. Mr.V.Ayyadurai, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this court to the agreem
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.