SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 33

Rajendra Menon, CJ
Sadhna Kumari – Appellant
Versus
The Bihat State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and Ors – Respondent
Request Case No.8 of 2016 | Request Case No.9 of 2016 | Request Case No.47 of 2016 | Request Case No.37 of 2016 | Request Case No.38 of 2016 | Request Case No.39 of 2016 | Request Case No.40 of 2016 | Request Case No.46 of 2016 | Request Case No.29 of 2016 | Request Case No.30 of 2016 | Request Case No.31 of 2016 | Request Case No.32 of 2016 | Request Case No.33 of 2016 | Request Case No.34 of 2016 | Request Case No.35 of 2016 | Request Case No.36 of 2016



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Mr. P.K. Sahi, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Jitendra Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate, Mr. Abhiprav Singh, Advocate, Mr. Yash Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay, Advocate

An arbitration agreement exists despite challenges, and an independent arbitrator must be appointed due to conflicts of interest with the originally named arbitrator.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 11(6) - Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 - Dispute over execution of agreement for milling of paddy - Petitioners sought arbitration to resolve disputes arising from certificate proceedings initiated without dispute adjudication. Court agreed that arbitrator could not be named in the agreement due to conflicts of interest and appointed an independent arbitrator instead. (Paras 3, 11, 15)

(B) Arbitration Agreement - The court clarified that Clause 16 constituted a binding arbitration agreement and that the defaulting arbitrator (District Collector) was ineligible under Section 12(5). (Paras 7, 14)

(C) Recovery Proceedings - The court determined that certificate proceedings did not preclude the right to seek arbitration, and prior admissions by respondents about arbitration were noted as significant. (Paras 11, 12)

Findings of Court:
Petitions allowed, and Justice (Retired) R.K. Datta appointed as arbitrator.

Issues: The main issues included the validity of the Named Arbitrator and the maintainability of arbitration in light of previous certificate proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that an independent arbitrator must be appointed due to the Collector's conflict of interest, emphasizing the need for impartiality in arbitration processes.

Result: Applications allowed, appointing an independent arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute.

Table of Content
1. final order to allow applications and appoint arbitrator. (Para 4)

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date: 19-04-2017

These are sixteen applications filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute that has arisen between the parties in execution of an agreement and, as questions of law and fact are similar in all the cases, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the documents and pleadings in the record of Request Case No.8 of 2016 are being referred to in this order.

3. The applicants herein and the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, the respondents, entered into agreement for milling of paddy for Kharif marketing for the seasons 2012-2013. Annexure-1 dated 14.2.2013 is the agreement available on record and Clause 15 and 16 of the agreement, which are identical in all the cases read as under:

15. The second party agrees that in case, any amount found recoverable on account of default, loss, damage on the part of the second party, the said recoverable amount with interest will be recovered as Land Revenue under Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 by instituting Certificate case before the concerned District Certificate Officer.

16. In case of disputes both parties agree to settle the issue(s) on mutual discussion. Failure to reach agreement the matter will be referred to arbitrator. It has been also agreed that the arbitrator will be District Collector of the concerned District whose decision shall be final, concerning the dispute referred to him.=

4. It seems that certain dispute arose and the Board issued show cause notices and initiated certificate proceedings under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (for short, Recovery Act) under Clause 19.

5. Petitioners challenged these proceedings by filing writ petitions before this Court and the petitioners were granted liberty to raise objections before the Certificate Officer-cum- Subdivisional Officer under Section 9 of the Recovery Act. The petitioners raised the claim. Their objections were rejected and when the certificates for recovery of the amount were issued, they filed these applications, inter alia seeking constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal in accordance to the requirement of Clause-16 reproduced hereinabove.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the recovery proceedings initiated without adjudication of the dispute is unsustainable and, as the recovery proceedings under the Certificate Act, proceedings is unsustainable, they are not liable to pay the amount. They want resolution of the dispute by taking recourse to Clause-16 of the agreement.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that Clause-16 is an arbitration agreement and even though in the arbitration agreement the District Collector is nominated as a named arbitrator, but in view of Section-12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the provisions of Schedule-7, Clause-1 thereof , the Collector being an employee of the organization and a person having business relationship and interested in the dispute, cannot act as an arbitrator and, therefore, an independent arbitrator should be appointed. In support of the aforesaid contention, a reasoned judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Voestalpine Schienen GMBH v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. , reported in AIR 2017 SC 939 is relied upon.

8. Learned senior Counsel for the petitioners took us through various aspects of the matter, the principle laid down by the Supreme Court, the recommendations made by the Law Commission, the amendment to the provisions of Section-12 and argues that it is a fit case where the independent arbitrator should be appointed. Learned Counsel invites our attention to the views recorded by the Supreme Court at para-17, in the case of M/s. Voestalpine (supra) various judgments of the Supreme Court on the subject in question with

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top