Back
NINALA JAYASURYA, NYAPATHY VIJAY
Tuf Metallurgical Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Bst Hk Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
ICOMAA. No.2 of 2024
Nyapathy Vijay, J.—The present appeal is filed under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 questioning the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in ICOMAOA.14 of 2024.
2. Facts of the case: The brief facts leading to this case are as under:
The 1st Respondent company was registered under the Laws of Hong Kong and the Appellant company was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and both are engaged in the business of trading of iron ore. The Appellant and Respondent No.1 had executed a contract on 19.12.2023 for sale/purchase of 55000 WMT (+/- 10% WMT) iron ore fines vide contract No.BST/TUF/20231219. As per the contract, the Appellant represented that the Cargo with certain specifications would be supplied. The relevant part of the specification for the purpose of this case is that the iron ore would be having an ‘Fe’ content of 56%.
3. As per Clause 4.1 of the Contract, the base price of the Cargo was USD 96.00 per DMT CFR FO on the premise that the cargo of iron ore has 56% ‘Fe’ content. As per Clause 5, if the ‘Fe’ content of the Cargo was below 54.00%, the 1st Responde
(1) Attachment before Judgment – Even in absence of necessary pleadings, Court can exercise power of attachment under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC.(2) Attachment before Judgment – Order 38 Rule 5 CPC does not....
Interim relief under Arbitration Act can secure assets to prevent loss of arbitral awards, necessitating enforcement of contractual obligations despite procedural technicalities.
The court emphasized the necessity of satisfying pre-conditions under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC for granting interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act.
An attachment before judgment requires a strong prima facie case and demonstration of urgency, which the appellant failed to establish.
A conditional order of attachment under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not constitute a final order, allowing the respondent to furnish security to lift the attachment.
The financial distress of a party cannot justify securing unadjudicated claims as interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act; a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable ha....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the wide powers of the court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to grant interim measures and protect the subject matter....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Court applied the principles of strong prima facie case and weighing the balance of convenience in favor of the respondent company in gran....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
