HCL COMNET SYSTEMS Vs. V. RAMGOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner, HCL Comnet Systems, is by this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act"), challenging the impugned Award dated 10th January 2013 passed by the learned Arbitrator in its dispute with the Respondent, V. Ramgopal. The learned Arbitrator held that the Respondent was entitled to receive Rs. 4,05,854 along with future interest @ 8% per annum payable upon an amount of Rs. 1,92,094.

(2.) The Respondent was appointed by the Petitioner as Consultant, Telecommunication under the "Senior Management Training Scheme" by letter dated 10th March 1995. The Respondent received promotions subsequently and in July, 1996 was given a Maruti Zen Car which was arranged for by the Petitioner. A Memorandum of Agreement ("MoA") was entered between the parties on 1st November 1996 in respect of the said car. The MoA noted that the Petitioner had entered into a lease agreement with a finance company for the car. The Petitioner was the Lessee and the Respondent was only the bailee. Equated monthly instalments (EMIs) were payable to the finance company of which the Respondent's share was Rs. 2,677 per month. The Respondent authorized the Petitioner to deduct the said sum from his salary. The lease period was for 60 months.

(3.) In terms of Clause 3 of the MoA, the Respondent was entitled to pay consideration computed at 1% of the value of the car after the expiry lease period in order to purchase the car from the Petitioner. Clause 3 also provided that the car would remain in the possession of the Respondent. Clause 10 of the MoA reads as under: