2021 (12) TMI 1479

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt, New Delhi, dismissing the petition filed by the appellants under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") as not maintainable before the learned District Court for lack of pecuniary jurisdiction on the ground that the "Aggregate Value" of the claims of the respondent laid before the learned Sole Arbitrator exceeded Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees two crore). 2. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the respondent had raised ten claims before the learned Sole Arbitrator. The first nine claims aggregated to an amount of Rs.1,92,49,235/- (Rupees one crore ninety-two lakh forty-nine thousand two-hundred thirty-five). Claim no. 10 was for future and pendente lite interest whic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd no merit in the same. 5. Section 12 of the Commercial Courts Act, so far as is relevant for the purposes of adjudication of the present appeal, is reproduced hereinunder: "12. Determination of Specified Value.- (1) The Specified Value of the subject matter of the commercial dispute in a suit, appeal or application shall be determined in the following manner:- (a) where the relief sought in a suit or application is for recovery of money, the money sought to be recovered in the suit or application inclusive of interest, if any, computed upto the date of filing of the suit or application, as the case may be, shall be taken into account for determining such Specified Value. xxxxx (2) The aggreg....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... In Section 12(2) of the Commercial Courts Act we find no reason to restrict the ambit and width of "value of claim" in arbitration from its natural meaning of including interest claimed till the date of invocation of arbitration. There is no doubt to the proposition that where in relation to the same subject-matter, different words are used in the same statute, there is a presumption that they are not used in the same sense. However, this is only a presumption and cannot be placed in service where the meaning of the statute is otherwise unambiguous and clear. 8. The judgments in M/s Icon Controls Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Mishrilal Tarachand Lodha (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants can be of no assistance to the a....