(1.) By these two arbitration petitions filed under Sec. 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the said Act") both the appellants have impugned part of the same order i.e. dated 22nd April, 2016 passed by the learned arbitrator in an application filed under Sec. 17 of the said Act refusing to grant part of the relief in favour of the appellant in Arbitration Petition (Lodging) No. 618 of 2016 and granting part of the reliefs against the appellant in Arbitration Petition (Lodging) No. 629 of 2016. Both the appellants have therefore, impugned part of the order passed by the learned arbitrator against each other. Since both the petitions are arising out of the same order, both the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these petitions are as under:
(2.) The appellant in Arbitration Petition (Lodging) No. 618 of 2016 was the original claimant, whereas the appellant in Arbitration Petition (Lodging) No. 629 of 2016 was the original respondent in the arbitral proceedings.
(3.) The original claimant carries on the business of mining and other mining related business and activities. The original respondent No. 1 is a co -operative society and is also a leaseholder in respect of the land admeasuring 79.981 Hectares situated at Village Mirya Dongar, Tahsil Pen, District Raigad which is leased by the State Government to the respondent No. 1 for the purpose of Bauxite mining. The original claimant and the respondent No. 1 entered into an agreement dated 14th December, 2007 for the purpose of extraction and sale of total bauxite deposit in the said mine for a consideration of Rs. 2,62,50,000/ -. It is not in dispute that out of the said consideration amount of Rs. 2,62,50,000/ - the claimant has already paid the said amount except a sum of Rs. 75,00,000/ - which was payable by the claimant to the respondent No. 1 on the respondent No. 1 receiving MOEF clearance.