TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 1210
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en the counsel for the respondent appeared on advance notice and though notice of the appeal was not issued but the matter was adjourned from time to time to enable the parties to amicably settle the same. Finding the parties to be not able to settle, a direction for their appearance in person before this Court was made. We were informed that of the three Directors of the appellant, two namely Mr. Rajiv Goyal and his wife Ms. Alka Goyal were abroad on account of illness of Mr. Rajiv Goyal. On 22nd May, 2014 Mr. Jaswinder Singh, stated to be the third Director of the appellant appeared before us. However he stated that he had ceased to be a Director and feigned ignorance of the facts. We accordingly heard the counsels on the appeal. 2. Un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....file a reply to the petition, directed the appellant to make payment of arrears of rent/damages at the rate at which it was last paid and to continue to pay the same in future every month in advance. The arrears were directed to be paid within two weeks. 5. We may record that during the pendency of this appeal, the appellant, on 25th March, 2014, has vacated the entire premises and delivered possession thereof to the respondent. Now only the question of payment of the amounts due to the respondent remains. 6. The contention of the counsel for the appellant is that no such direction for payment could be issued under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. 7. We asked the counsel for the appellant as to what is the defence of the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant is abusing the cloak of a corporate identity which we suspect would be a shell company, without any asset and from which no recovery of money can be made, to avoid payment of their liabilities. Though we were inclined to ourselves take action but the counsel for the respondent informs that a separate petition in this regard has already been filed. We therefore deem it appropriate to leave this aspect for consideration in that proceeding. 12. As far as the contention of the counsel for the appellant of a direction as issued by the learned Single Judge being beyond the domain of a proceeding under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act is concerned, Section 9 is titled as "Interim measures, etc. by Court" and provides for an appli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been granted in the impugned order. Order XXXIX Rule 10 of the CPC empowers the Court to direct deposit/payment of admitted amounts. The appellant, as aforesaid does not controvert that it continued to be the tenant of office unit B-1 and had not terminated the tenancy with respect thereto. There is thus an admission by the appellant of the liability for rent at least of office unit B-1. The appellant, if had been a defendant in a suit, could have thus been directed by an interim order in the suit to make such payment to the respondent. Order XV-A added to the CPC as applicable to Delhi and which was added, as held by us in judgment dated 15th May, 2014 in FAO(OS)597/2013 titled Raghubir Rai Vs. Prem Lata, to empower the Court to direct pay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and no such power is conferred upon the Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. Reference was also made to Section 19 of the Arbitration Act to hold that the provisions of the CPC are not applicable. The said observations however came to be made after the Court held that the direction issued by the Single Judge for payment was not only beyond the ambit of the reliefs claimed in the petition under Section 9 but also beyond the disputes between the parties. Also, it was not noticed that Section 9 expressly provides that the Court while exercising power thereunder shall have the same power as it has in relation to any proceedings before it and which in our opinion as aforesaid would include the powers under Order XXXIX Rule 10 and under....