LAWS(DLH)-1999-4-69

ITC LIMITED Vs. PRADEEP ANAND

Decided On April 22, 1999
ITC LIMITED Appellant
V/S
PRADEEP ANAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been moved on behalf of ITC Ltd. under Order XXXIX, Rules I and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and read with Section 41(b) of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Arbitration Act'). By this application the petitioner seeks interim order of stay of any further proceedings before the Arbitrator being respondent No. 5 (Mr. Datuk George K.S.Seah) pursuant to the partial award dated 24.4.1998 in ICC Arbitration No. 808(1/BGD/OLG till hearing and final disposal of OMP No. 197/98. Respondent No. I only has opposed this application. Respondents 2 and 3 are with the petitioner.

(2.) The facts of the case as appear to be from the record are that a Co-operation Agreement dated 11.9.1990 was entered into between Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba Battery Company Limited, ITC Limited, Toshiba Anand Batteries Ltd. and Shri C.L. Anand. It contained an arbitration clause. Certain disputes arose and Pradeep Anand s/o late Shri C.L.Anand sought reference of the disputes to arbitration and consequently in accordance with rules applicable Shri Datuk George K.S. Seah (respondent No. 5 in the main petition) was appointed as Sole Arbitrator. Learned Arbitrator gave his partial award (which the petitioner asserts as final award) on 24.4.1998. An original copy of the said award was received by the petitioner on 6.5.1998. The petitioner ITC Ltd. moved an application undersection 14(2) of the Arbitration Act in this Court on 22.5.1998 with a request that the learned Arbitrator be directed by this Court to file in this Court the said partial award dated 24.4.1998 made and issued by him. This petition was taken up by the cocerned Joint Registraron 27.5.1998 and notice was issued to respondent No. 5 (the learned Arbitrator) to file the said award alongwith the proceedings.

(3.) OMP No. 197/98, in which this application for interim stay has been moved, was filed on 12.9.1998. By that time the said award had not been filed by the learned Arbitrator in Suit No. 1084A/98. On perusal of the order-sheets of said suit it is to be found that the original partial award dated 24.41998 was filed by the learned Arbitrator as late as some time in the month of February, 1999. On 26.2.19991 passed orders in the said suit (which is also pending before me) that original partial award dated 24.4.1998 had been filed and notice of filing of the award be issued to the parties and it was directed that they may file objections, if any, within the statutory period.