Court dismissed a post-award petition for reimbursement under Section 9, affirming such claims must be resolved within the ongoing Section 34 proceedings, emphasizing limited jurisdiction.

JUDGMENT :

Gaurang Kanth, J.

1. The Petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , seeking a post-award interim order directing Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to pay a sum of Rs. 5,50,108/- each to the Petitioners towards reimbursement of Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) tax paid by them on behalf of the partnership firm, M/s. Chander Niwas.

2. The relevant facts leading to the present petition are as follows:

3. The parties to the present petition are partners of a partnership firm namely M/s. Chander Niwas, which owns and manages a multistoried building situated at Premises No. 10B, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata – 700071. The sole source of income of the firm is derived from the exploitation of the said property, which is partly occupied by tenants and partly by the partners themselves. The said premises are presently under the custody of a Receiver appointed by this Hon’ble Court.

4. Subsequently, disputes and differences arose between the partners concerning the affairs of the firm and the management of the said immovable property. The disputes were referred to arbitration, and the Arbitral Tribunal published its Award on 23.12.2019. Petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , challenging the said Award, were filed by both parties and are presently pending consideration before this Court.

5. The said premises had a substantial outstanding Kolkata Municipal Corporation tax liability amounting to Rs. 1,89,63,358/-. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation announced a Waiver Scheme for a limited period, under which payment of the principal outstanding within a stipulated time would entitle the assessee to waiver of interest and penalty. Under this Scheme, the total payable amount was reduced to Rs. 44,42,123/-.

6. The Petitioners requested the Receiver as well as the other partners to contribute their respective shares toward the said payment so that the firm could avail of the benefit of the Waiver Scheme. However, neither the Receiver nor the other partners took any steps in this regard. Consequently, the Petitioners filed A.P. No. 80 of 2021 seeking directions upon the Receiver to make the payment from the funds lying with him.

7. Since the Waiver Scheme was expiring on 28.02.2021, and in order to safeguard the firm’s interest, the Petitioners paid the entire amount of Rs. 44,42,123/- from their own resources to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Additionally, the Petitioners paid a further sum of Rs. 3,08,720/- to the Corporation, following which a No Due Certificate up to 31.03.2021 was issued by the KMC.

8. By an order dated 05.03.2021, this Court disposed of A.P. No. 80 of 2021, directing the Receiver to disburse Rs. 20,00,000/- from the funds lying in his custody to the Petitioners as part satisfaction of their claim towards the Corporation tax liability. The Respondents were also directed to pay their respective balance shares of the said liability.

9. Aggrieved by the said order, Respondent No. 1 preferred an appeal being A.P.O.T. No. 71 of 2021. The Hon’ble Division Bench, by order dated 16.04.2021, upheld the direction upon the Receiver to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- to the Petitioners as ad hoc payment towards the Corporation tax liability. The Division Bench further directed the Receiver to scrutinize the bills and receipts relating to the tax payments and to apportion the liability of each partner according to their respective shares. The Receiver was also directed to prepare a report and a statement of accounts reflecting the apportionment of liability and taking into