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)(SC) 1580

SUPREME COURT
A. M. Sapre, J
Venture Global Engineering LLC – Appellant
Versus
Tech Mahindra Ltd. – Respondent
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.29747-29749 of 2013 | Special Leave Petition (C) No.8298 of 2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. K. K. Venugopal, Mr. K. V. Vishwanathan
For the Respondents: Mr. Iqbal Chagla

An arbitral award obtained through fraud and misrepresentation violates public policy, rendering it unenforceable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 34 - Issues of public policy and fraud in relation to the enforcement of an arbitral award - High Court's reversal of the trial court's setting aside of the arbitral award on grounds of issue estoppel is contested. The trial court found that the award was set aside due to Mr. Raju's fraud concerning financial misrepresentation impacting the validity of the award, which violates public policy in India. The appellate decision underscored that an award obtained through fraud is tainted and cannot be enforced, while highlighting the importance of due process. (Paras 1-192)

Facts of the case:
Venture claimed fraud by Satyam's chairman, leading to inflated profits. The award instructed Venture to transfer shares at a depreciated value, which was challenged under the Arbitration Act.

Findings of Court:
The High Court ruled that evidence of Mr. Raju's fraud necessitated setting aside the award, emphasizing that all parties must comply with Indian law.

Issues: Primary contention revolved around whether the actions of Satyam's chairman constituted fraud that affected the arbitration outcome and violated public policy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that fraud devalues any legal proceedings; therefore, the award, obtained through misrepresentation, is unenforceable.

Result: Appeals granted; the arbitral award set aside.

Table of Content
1. leave granted in both slps; court's decision supports the conclusion of high court. (Para 1)
2. background context includes arbitration details and relevant agreement. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. details regarding proceedings initiated in multiple jurisdictions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11)
4. court deliberates on previous judgments regarding procedural validity. (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 19)
5. appeals outcome against prior court decisions related to enforcement of the award. (Para 18 , 26 , 27 , 30)
6. legal principles governing arbitration and setting aside of awards. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
7. substantial reference to fraudulent acts impacting arbitration outcomes. (Para 36 , 41 , 46 , 149 , 150)
8. court identifies public policy violations justifying the setting aside of the award. (Para 156 , 175)

1. Leave granted in both the SLPs.
I had the advantage of reading the opinion of my learned brother Justice Sapre. While I agree with the conclusion recorded by him that the High Court erred in its conclusion on the question whether the proceedings initiated by VENTURE in OP No. 390 of 2008 are barred by the principle of "issue estoppel", I am unable to persuade myself to agree with his conclusions that the judgment under appeal is required to be reversed on the questions relating to public policy and fraud for the following reasons;

2. The facts of these appeals are narrated in great detail by my learned brother. There is no need to repeat except to mention those which are essential for the purpose of my conclusion.

3. An Arbitral Award dated 3rd April, 2006 (hereinafter the AWARD) came to be passed in an arbitration between VENTURE and SATYAM.
The relevant portion of the AWARD reads as under:
"A. I order VGE to deliver to Satyam share certificates in form suitable for immediate transfer to Satyam or its designee evidencing all of VGE's ownership interest legal and / or beneficial in SVES. I further order it to do all that may otherwise be necessary to effect the transfer of such ownership to Satyam or its designee."


4. The dispute leading to the Arbitration and the AWARD arose out of the Agreement dated 20th October, 1999 (Agreement I) entered into between VENTURE and SATYAM.

5. Article VIII of the said Agreement defined the expression "Events of Default" and stipulated the consequences thereof:
"ARTICLE VIII EVENTS OF DEFAULT AND REMEDIES
S.8.01 Events of Default
For the purposes of this Agreement, an "Event of Default" means, with respect to any Shareholder, the occurrence of any of the following:
(a) A Bankruptcy Event occurs with respect to such Shareholder.
(b) Subject to clause (c) and (d) below, such Shareholder breaches this Agreement in any material respect and fails to cure such breach within thirty (30) days after being notified in writing by the other Shareholder of such breach.
(c) A Shareholder Transfers, or attempts to Transfer, any Shares in violation of the transfer restrictions set forth in Article VII of this Agreement.
(d) Such Shareholder is subject to Change in Control
S.8.02 Rights Upon Events of Default Generally
Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default (other than a Bankruptcy Event) with respect to any Shareholder (the Defaulting Shareholder"), the other Shareholder (the "Non - Defaulting Shareholder") shall have the option, within thirty (30) days after becoming aware of the Event of Default to (a) purchase the Defaulting Shareholder's Shares at book value and repay Shareholder's loan, or (b) cause the immediate dissolution and liquidation of the COMPANY in accordance with Article IX. Either of such options must be exercised by the Non - Defaulting Shareholder by written notice to the Defaulting Shareholder within thirty (30) days after becoming aware of the subject Event of Default.
S.8.03 Rights Upon Bankruptcy Event
Upon the occurrence of a Bankruptcy Event with respect to any Shareholder (the "Bankrupt Shareholder"), such shareholder shall give immediate written notice to the other Shareholder (t






























































































































































































































































































































































































































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top