SARVESH CHOPRA Vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by means of this objection petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the Award dated 29.10.2002 passed by the sole Arbitrator. The only issue which is decided by the Arbitrator is that there has been accord and satisfaction and consequently there does not arise any issue to be determined in Arbitration. This issue was decided as a preliminary issue without going into any other aspect of the matter.

(2.) Whether or not there is accord and satisfaction is surely a question of fact. There may or may not be accord and satisfaction, depending on the facts of each case. The Supreme Court recently in the judgment reported as National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Bogara Polyfab, 2009 1 SCC 267 has considered the issue of existence of live claims or whether there is accord and satisfaction, in detail, and has given the following examples to determine whether or not there are live claims which are to be referred to the Arbitration.

(3.) In the facts of the present case it will have to be seen as to whether there is accord and satisfaction. One thing is however clear that no evidence was led by the parties on this issue, and therefore, it is not an Award passed after considering the issue after evidence had been led as to whether or not there is accord and satisfaction or that there was any undue coercion and pressure for the present petitioner to agree to the payment as received by it under the so called accord and satisfaction.