ULTRA ENTERTAINMENT SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY Vs. ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL COMPRISING OF (MR. JUSTICE K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, MR. JUSTICE L. SREENIVASA REDDY AND MR. JUSTICE R.G. VAIDYANATHA) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE legality and correctness of the order dt. 26.6.2013 passed on an application filed by the petitioner before the Arbitral Tribunal in the matter of arbitral dispute between the petitioner and the respondent is called in question in this Writ Petition. An award came to be passed on 30.12.2006, allowing the claim of the petitioner against the respondent for a sum of Rs. 4,50,00,000/ - with interest thereon at the rate of 12% p.a. from 20th August 2004 till payment. An award was also passed in favour of the respondent by the majority of the members of the Tribunal directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 67,57,79,000/ - with interest thereon at 12% p.a. from 20th August 2007. The said award was not challenged either by the petitioner or by the respondent u/s. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. On the contrary on 1.2.2007 the respondent made an application requesting the Tribunal to pass an additional award on one of the claims made by it in its counter claim contending that the same had not been contested. When the said application was pending the petitioner herein made an application u/s. 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, by this Writ petitioner stating that one of the Arbitrators Mr. Justice K. Shivashankar Bhat had not disclosed to the parties about his daughter who is an Advocate working in the office of the respondents Advocate. Later Shiva Shankar Bhat fairly withdrew from the office of Arbitration. In his place Hon. Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa was appointed as new Arbitrator. Thereafter the respondent filed a Writ Petition before this court challenging the appointment of Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa, which petition came to be allowed by this court and appointment of Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa was set aside and liberty was granted to the parties to appoint another Arbitrator in place of Mr. Justice Shivashankar Bhat.

(2.) THE said order was challenged by the petitioner herein before the Hon. Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 7955/2012. The Hon. Supreme Court by its order dt. 8.11.2012 confirmed the order of the High Court to the extent of cancelling the appointment of Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa as Arbitrator and appointed justice R.G. Vidyanatha as Arbitrator in place of Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa. After reconstitution of the Arbitral Tribunal, arguments were heard on the applications and after hearing arguments on the Memo filed by the respondent requesting the Arbitral Tribunal to pass an additional award was dismissed as not pressed. The application filed u/s. 13 of the Arbitration Act, by the petitioner herein came to be dismissed on the ground that Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed u/s. 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for review of the award passed by it. This order is called in question in this Writ Petition.

(3.) DURING the course of arguments, it is brought to our notice by the learned counsels appearing for both the parties that the Hon. Supreme Court while disposing of Civil Appeal No. 7955/12, and appointing R.G. Vaidyanatha, in place of Mr. Justice M.P. Chinnappa has observed as hereunder: