ULHAS DANDEKAR Vs. SUSHIL FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The core issue that falls for consideration in these Petitions under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the Act") is whether the absence of a prior written or recorded instruction for every transaction effected by a client through a stock broker would be fatal to a claim by the stock broker to settle accounts. For the reasons set out in this judgement, I am unable to agree with the Appellant that in the facts of this case, he has no liability to pay his dues owing to admitted absence of such instructions.

(2.) The captioned Petitions challenge two arbitral awards, both dated May 29, 2019 (collectively, "Impugned Award"), which are passed by an appellate arbitral tribunal constituted under the bye-laws of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. ("NSE"), disposing of cross-appeals against an earlier award dated January 22, 2019 ("First Award") passed by the arbitral tribunal of the first instance.

(3.) In a nutshell, Mr. Ulhas Dandekar ("Dandekar"), said to be an architect by qualification has had a broking account with his stock broker Sushil Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. ("Sushil") since 2006. The know-your-client ("KYC") documentation executed by Dandekar with Sushil provided for a designated email ID and a designated mobile number of Dandekar for correspondence and communication. The disputes relate to the period between April 1, 2017 and July 4, 2018 ("Dispute Period").