2018 Supreme(P&H) 216
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
KULDIP SINGH, J.
M/s Lakshmi Overseas Ind. Ltd. presently known as M/s Lakshmi Energy and Foods Ltd. - Petitioner
Versus
Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and another - Respondents
CR No. 6651 of 2013 (O/M)
Decided On : 27-02-2018
For the Petitioner:Mr. V.K. Jindal, Senior Advocate, with Mr. R. Kartikeya, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the arbitration agreement and the applicability of excepted matters, emphasizing the decision-making authority specified in the agreement.
Headnote:
Arbitration - Dispute Resolution - Clauses 8, 9, 17, 22 - The court discussed the arbitration agreement and the specific provisions in Clauses 8, 9, and 17 of the agreement, which provided for penalties, interest rates, and decision-making authority. The court highlighted the interpretation of the arbitration clause and its exceptions, emphasizing that disputes falling within the excepted matters were to be decided by the Director, Food and Supplies Department, Punjab.
Fact of the Case:
The Punjab State Warehousing Corporation referred a dispute to the Arbitrator regarding recovery of rice from a rice miller. The Arbitrator dropped the matter at a preliminary stage, but the District Judge remanded the case for a fresh decision. The court analyzed the specific provisions in the arbitration agreement and the dispute raised by the Corporation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute fell within the excepted matters specified in the agreement and was to be decided by the Director, Food and Supplies Department, Punjab. The court set aside the order of the District Judge and allowed the revision.
Issues: Interpretation of the arbitration agreement, applicability of excepted matters, and decision-making authority under the agreement.
Ratio Decidendi: The specific provisions in the arbitration agreement, particularly Clauses 8, 9, and 17, along with the interpretation of the excepted matters, influenced the court's decision. The court emphasized that disputes falling within the excepted matters were to be decided by the Director, Food and Supplies Department, Punjab.
Final Decision: The order of the District Judge was set aside, and the revision was allowed.
KULDIP SINGH, J.
1. Petitioner-M/s Lakshmi Overseas Ind. Ltd. presently known as M/s Lakshmi Energy and Foods Ltd. by way of present revision under Article 227 of Constitution of India, has impugned order dated 8.4.2013 (Annexure-P-8), passed by the learned District Judge, Chandigarh, vide which the order passed by the Arbitrator dated 16.12.2003 was set aside and the case was remanded to the Arbitrator for deciding the dispute afresh on merits.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Punjab State Warehousing Corporation through its District Manager, Fatehgarh Sahib, referred a dispute to the Arbitrator, namely, Shri G.S. Aggarwal, IAS (Retd.), Sole Arbitrator, making claim for recovery of Rs. 1,77,73,117/- plus interest at the rate of 21% upto 15.2.2003 with future interest at the rate of 21% per annum till the date of realization.
3. It comes out that during the crop year 1993-94, the petitioner rice miller was allotted the work of custom milling of paddy and delivery of its resultant rice to Food Corporation of India in its account. It comes out that there was Arbitration Agreement dated 12.10.1999 (Annexure-P-9) between the parties regarding storage of paddy in their mill premises. The petitioner was to mill the same as per terms and conditions mentioned therein and delivered it as per the terms of the agreement. The petitioner delivered limited quantity of rice and did not maintain the schedule as agreed. On account of alleged breach committed by rice miller-petitioner, the matter was referred to arbitration. The Sole Arbitrator, Shri G.S. Aggarwal, IAS (Retd.), while dealing with the matter came to the conclusion that present dispute regarding shortfall in recovery of rice has been specifically provided in Sub-clause (iii) of Clause 8 of the Agreement and dispute regarding late delivery of rice in Sub-clause (ii) of Clause 9 of the Agreement. While referring to Clause 22 of the Agreement, it was held that all the disputes except to any matter the decision of which is expressly provided for in the contract are referable to the Sole Arbitrator. The Arbitrator held that present dispute falls within the excepted matters. Therefore, he dropped the matter at preliminary stage. In appeal, the learned District Judge, Chandigarh, while relying upon the case laws came to the conclusion that the matter does not fall within the 'excepted matters' and, therefore, remanded the matter to the Sole Arbitrator for afresh decision.
4. I heard the learned counsels for the parties and have also carefully gone through the file.
5. It is necessary to reproduce the clause for which the Director of respondent Corporation is to take a decision. The relevant extract of Clause 8 (iii) is reproduced as under :-
'8. The miller shall ensure that :-
(i) xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx
(ii) xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx
(iii) In case there is a shortfall in the recovery of rice provided in sub-clause (i) above the miller shall pay to the Government the price of rice fixed by FCI plus interest at the rate of 21% from the date it become payable till the date of actual realization equivalent to the shortfall.
(iv) xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx
(v) xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx'
6. Clause 9 of the Agreement is reproduced as under :-
'9. The entire quantity of rice of all varieties delivered by the miller to the Government shall conform to the specifications laid down in the Punjab Rice Procurement (Levy) Order 1983, as amended from time to time or in any other ORDER OR NOTIFICATION issued by the Government of India from time to time. The stocks of rice not conforming to the specifications and the miller shall be liable to pay to the Government or Procuring Agency for the quantity of rice short supplied, a penalty at the custom milling rate fixed by Govt. of India plus 21% interest from the date it becomes payable till the date of actual realization of the converted variety of rice. The decision of