BHARAT SALT REFINERIES LTD Vs. COMPANIA NAVIERA SODNOC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above appeal is filed against the order dated 5/3/2007 passed by the learned single Judge in O. P. No. 388 of 2005.

(2.) THE brief facts are as follows: the appellant is a limited company incorporated under the Companies Act carrying on the business at Haveli, 32-D, North Crescent Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. The first respondent is also the company carrying on business in the name and style of M/s Compania Naviera "sodnoc", No. 16, Aristidon Street, Piracus 185 31, Greece. The second respondent is a sole arbitrator, who passed an award dated 2/3/2000. A Charter Party dated 24/8/1998 was entered into between Mutual Task Maritime Limited and the appellant herein in respect of the vessel MV Sea Mana, which was owned by Mutual Task Maritime Limited. As per the terms of the Charter party, the appellant chartered the Vessel MV Sea Mana for the carriage of 8,000 m. t. of bagged salt from Port Kandla, India to Tanga, Tanzania, on terms and conditions set out in the said charter party. The said Mutual Task Maritime Limited claimed damages for detention of a sum of US $ 43,483. 49 together with interest. The appellant denied the claim. Because of the dispute, the matter was referred to the second respondent, who is the Arbitrator. The place of arbitration is London. The parties to the agreement appeared before the Arbitrator and placed their respective case. The Arbitrator passed an award on 2/3/2000, directing the appellant to pay the claim amount of US $ 43,483. 49 to the Mutual Task Maritime Limited together with interest at 8% compounded with three monthly rests from 1/12/1998. After the award being passed, the awardee, the Mutual Task Maritime Limited assigned the award in favour of the first respondent assigning all rights arising out of the Charter Party dated 24/8/1998. Based on the assignment of award, the first respondent sent a letter of demand dated 29/6/2002 to the appellant to make payment of the amount due under the award. The appellant denied the liability to pay the said amount to the first respondent. Then another reminder was also sent by the first respondent to the appellant, but there was no response from the appellant. As no amount was paid by the appellant, the first respondent filed a petition under Sections 47 and 49 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the following reliefs.

(3.) THE appellant opposed the petition and resisted the claim of the first respondent. After considering the argument advanced by both the learned counsel, by reason of the impugned order, this Court held that the award dated 02. 03. 2000 is enforceable in law and directed the appellant to make the payment as per the award. The correctness of the said order is assailed in this appeal.