IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. PANIGRAHI, J.
M/s. Jaycee Housing Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Neelachal Buildtech & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar - Respondent
ARBA No.7 of 2024
Decided on : 08-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal under section 37 of the a&c act noted. (Para 1) |
| 2. background facts of the arbitration dispute. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. summary of parties' contentions. (Para 7) |
| 4. appellants' arguments on arbitration disqualification. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. respondent's submissions on maintainability. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. court's determination on preliminary issues. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. analyses of commercial courts act provisions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 8. court reviews previous case law and its implications. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 9. recent interpretations of commercial courts act cited. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 10. the court's conclusion on the applicable court for arbitration appeals. (Para 32) |
| 11. final instructions on appeal process and conclusion. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
S.K. PANIGRAHI, J.
1. This Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “A&C Act”) has been filed seeking setting aside of the judgment dated 2.2.2024 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Commercial Court, Bhubaneswar in Arbitration Petition No. 79 of 2015.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
2. The present Appellants are the original owner of 4 acres 875 decimals of land consisting of 15 contiguous plots. On 10.9.2002, the Appellants and the Respondent entered into an agreement for development of the said land. The present Appellants also entered into an agreement with one, Kesari Estates Pvt. Ltd. for the development of a portion of their land. On 14.9.2005, the present Appellants executed a bipartite agreement with the present Respondent as well as a tripartite agreement with the present Respondent and Kesari Estates Pvt. Ltd.
3. There were concerns pertaining to slow progress of work, inability of the Respondent to obtain approval for the revised plan from the Bhubaneswar Development Authority, etc. On multiple occasions, the present Appellants expressed their dissatisfaction with reference to the slow progress of work and failure of the Respondent to adhere to the agreed upon milestones of construction. A supplementary agreement was executed between the parties for extension of time to complete the project by 31.3.2011 on part payment of compensation of Rs. 30,00,000/- by 31.3.2012.. Several communications were made for payment of compensation, after which the parties agreed to resolve the dispute by reference to arbitration. The present Respondent invoked the arbitration clause as per the tripartite agreement dated 14.9.2005.
4. The present Respondent (Original Claimant) filed its statement of claims under 12 different heads, to which the present Appellant filed its counter statement and counter claims. Hearing commenced and in view of the pleadings and evidence led in the proceeding, the Ld. Tribunal passed the arbitral award dated 30.6.2015 in which Rs. 2,12,13,336/- at 18% interest p.a. was awarded in favour of the present Respondent and Rs. 15,00,000/- at 18% interest p.a. was awarded in favour of the present Appellants towards the counter claims.
5. Aggrieved, the Appellants approached the learned Senior Civil Judge, Commercial Court, Bhubaneswar in Arbitration Petition No. 79 of 2015 under Section 34 of the A&C Act seeking modification of the award.
6. Having heard the parties, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Commercial Court, Bhubaneswar was pleased to hold that the present Appellants had failed to make out any case for interference with the award and accordingly the application under Section 34 of the A&C Act was dismissed for being devoid of merits.
7. Now that the facts leading to the instant Appeal have been laid down, this Court shall endeavour to summarise the contentions of the Parties and the broad grounds that have been raised to seek the exercise of this Court’s limited jurisdiction available under S. 37 of the A&C Act.
II. APPELLANTS’ SUBMISSIONS:
8. Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellants assails the arbitral award and the judgment
Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd.
State of Maharashtra v. Ark Builders Pvt. Ltd.
Benarsi Krishna Committee v. Karmyogi Shelters (P) Ltd.
Ellora Paper Mills Ltd. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The jurisdiction for appeals regarding arbitration awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act lies with the Commercial Appellate Court as prescribed by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, superse....
Jurisdiction of Commercial Courts – All applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, other than international commercial arbitration,....
The provisions of the CC Act prevail over the provisions of the A&C Act in relation to the jurisdiction and powers of Commercial Courts to deal with commercial disputes, including arbitral disputes.
Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement - Application of any of the parties to the suit, withdraw such suit or application from the court before which it is pend....
Venue of arbitration does not equate to its jurisdictional seat; petitions under the Arbitration Act must be filed where arbitration took place, as established in prior Supreme Court rulings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the jurisdiction and classification of cases for challenges to International Commercial Arbitration Awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and ....
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.