SHOFT SHIPYARD PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. GOA SHIPYARD LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question arising for consideration in these applications is, as to whether the applications filed under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "Arbitration Act") or even the present appeals filed under Sec. 37 thereof, were maintainable, in the absence of compliance with the mandatory deposit of 75% of the amount awarded under the arbitration award, as required under Sec. 19 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the "MSMED Act").

(2.) This question specifically arises in the context of the admitted factual position that the arbitrator in the present case was appointed under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration Act by an order of this Court and the arbitration proceedings were not conducted before either the facilitation council or any institution or centre to which the dispute was referred by the facilitation council under Sec. 18 of the MSMED Act. While the applicant claims that such mandatory pre-deposit of 75% of the awarded amount applies, even if the arbitration proceeding has not been conducted by either the facilitation council or an institution or centre appointed by it under Sec. 18 of the MSMED Act, the respondent in the application i.e. the original appellant contends to the contrary. It is specifically contended on behalf of the original appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "respondent") that the mandatory pre-deposit of 75% awarded amount applies only in cases where the arbitral award has been rendered pursuant to an arbitration proceeding conducted either by the facilitation council or an institution or centre appointed by it under Sec. 18 of the MSMED Act.

(3.) It is the case of the applicant that since the respondent admittedly did not make such a mandatory pre-deposit at the stage of filing of the applications under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration Act before the District Court and also because no such mandatory pre-deposit was made while filing instant appeals before this Court, on this short ground itself the present appeals ought to be dismissed.