G. SATHYAN Vs. B. VASUDEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Side Appeal is directed against the orders of the learned single Judge, dated 22.04.2016 in O.P. No. 553 of 2011 dismissing the O.P, filed under Sec. 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by confirming the Arbitral Award passed by the second respondent.

(2.) The brief facts of the case relevant for disposal of the appeal are as follows :

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the learned Arbitrator went against Clause 17 of the Partnership Deed and effectively brought to close of the firm; fixation of Rs.7.5 lakhs per year as profits earned by the firm from 01.04.2010 is in utter contravention with the fundamentals of law and the basic concepts of justice; the learned Arbitrator went beyond the scope of the claim petition itself by directing a bidding process between the partners by the Executing Court, which even a Civil Court could not do in a suit for dissolution of partnership firm. When this Court while dealing with the matter under Sec. 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, passed interim orders whereby appointing Chartered Engineer and valued the assets with the consent of both sides, ought to have directed the appellant / petitioner to pay 50% of the sum as determined by the Chartered Engineer in his Report; the learned Arbitrator misinterpreted the MOU, which only contends broad understanding and the same cannot be treated as a binding agreement between the parties and therefore, the order of the learned single Judge is to be set aside.