The Purchase Order does not contain an arbitration clause at all. In such circumstances, it is, in my view, not possible to hold that the parties agreed to a particular seat of the arbitration which would vest jurisdiction in this Court despite the provisions of the MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
O.M.P. (COMM) 343/2017 & I.A. 10512/2017
AHLUWALIA CONTRACTS (INDIA) LTD vs OZONE RESEARCH &APPLICATIONS (I) PVT. LTD. & ANR.
The current petition was filed under Section 34 (Application for setting aside arbitral awards) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Arbitration Act), directed against an award rendered by the Micro and Small Enterprises, Facilitation Council, Nagpur in a claim lodged by the respondent No. 1 against the petitioner claiming to be a Micro and Small Enterprise. Petition before the HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The disputes between the parties arose out of a Purchase Order of 22.05.2010. Clause 8 of the Purchase Order states, “All disputes are subject to Delhi Jurisdiction.”
The Purchase Order did not contain an arbitration clause, the claims of respondent No. 1 here were referred for conciliation and arbitration to the Facilitation Council under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSMED Act”).
By the virtue of the above mentioned provision the Facilitation Council in Nagpur, where respondent No. 1 was located, assumed jurisdiction and rendered the award.
The respondent No. 1 contended that the arbitration had been conducted under the MSMED Act in Nagpur and the award was rendered in Nagpur. Therefore, the contention that challenge to the award would not lie before this Court.
The Court took notice that the Purchase Order did not contain an arbitration clause at all. Thus it stated that in such a circumstance it was not possible to hold the parties agreed to a particular seat of the arbitration which would vest jurisdiction in this Court despite the provisions of the MSMED Act.
Thus the Court was of the view that the seat of the arbitration, conducted by the Facilitation Council in Nagpur and the petition filed before this Court was not maintainable.
The Court dismissed the pending application on the grounds of non-maintainability and gave liberty to the petitioner to file a petition for the same cause to the appropriate Court.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ADITYA G S.
Click here to view your judgement