TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court dismisses one appeal, allows three others, clarifies arbitration jurisdiction, and sets deadline for decision.</h1> <h3>Indian Oil Corporation Limited Versus NCC Limited</h3> Indian Oil Corporation Limited Versus NCC Limited - TMI Issues Involved:1. Validity and applicability of arbitration clauses.2. Definition and scope of 'Notified Claims'.3. Jurisdiction of the General Manager in determining arbitrability.4. Accord and satisfaction of claims.5. Role of the court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996.6. Interpretation of contract clauses related to dispute resolution.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity and Applicability of Arbitration Clauses:The judgment addresses the issue of whether disputes between the parties can be referred to arbitration under the existing arbitration clauses in the General Conditions of Contract (GCC). The court noted that the parties are bound by the terms of the contract, which includes specific provisions regarding arbitration. The court emphasized that party autonomy is central to arbitration and that the terms of the contract must be interpreted as intended by the parties.2. Definition and Scope of 'Notified Claims':The judgment extensively discusses the concept of 'Notified Claims' as defined in Clause 1.21.0.0 of the GCC. A claim must be notified in writing to the Engineer-in-Charge and the Site Engineer within ten days of the event giving rise to the claim. The court highlighted that only claims that follow this procedure can be considered 'Notified Claims' and are eligible for arbitration. The court also noted that any claims not notified as per the stipulated procedure are deemed waived.3. Jurisdiction of the General Manager in Determining Arbitrability:The court examined the role of the General Manager under Clause 9.0.2.0 of the GCC, which grants the General Manager the authority to decide whether a claim is a 'Notified Claim' and thus arbitrable. The court held that the General Manager's decision on whether a claim is a 'Notified Claim' is final and cannot be referred to arbitration. This clause is part of the contract and binding on both parties.4. Accord and Satisfaction of Claims:The issue of whether the claims were settled through 'accord and satisfaction' was a significant point of contention. The court observed that this issue is debatable and should be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal. The court noted that the acceptance of Rs.4,53,04,021 by the respondent under alleged duress and coercion is a matter to be examined by the Arbitral Tribunal.5. Role of the Court Under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996:The court discussed the limited scope of judicial intervention under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996, which is confined to examining the existence of an arbitration agreement. The court cited various precedents to emphasize that the court should refer matters to arbitration unless it is manifestly clear that the arbitration agreement does not cover the dispute. The court also noted that issues of non-arbitrability should generally be left to the Arbitral Tribunal.6. Interpretation of Contract Clauses Related to Dispute Resolution:The court analyzed various clauses of the GCC, including Clauses 6.6.1.0, 6.6.3.0, 6.7.1.0, 6.7.2.0, 9.0.1.0, and 9.0.2.0, to determine their impact on the arbitrability of disputes. The court held that the contract clearly stipulates that only 'Notified Claims' included in the final bill can be referred to arbitration. The court also noted that the contract allows the General Manager to decide on the arbitrability of claims, and such decisions are binding.Judgment:1. Civil Appeal No. 341/2022: Dismissed. The Arbitral Tribunal will first decide the issue of 'accord and satisfaction' and arbitrability of the claims within three months.2. Civil Appeal No. 342/2022: Allowed. The High Court's order referring the dispute to arbitration is quashed.3. Civil Appeal Nos. 343/2022 and 345/2022: Allowed. The High Court's orders referring the disputes to arbitration are quashed.4. Civil Appeal No. 344/2022: Partly allowed. Only the claim declared as a 'Notified Claim' by the General Manager will be referred to arbitration. The Arbitral Tribunal will not have jurisdiction over other claims.The court concluded that the High Court erred in referring disputes that were not 'Notified Claims' to arbitration and emphasized the importance of adhering to the contract terms agreed upon by the parties.
TaxTMI 