TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 2042
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch the respondent is stated to have made purported admission of liability towards the respondent of an amount of Rs. 47,56,388/-. On this purported admission the Arbitral Tribunal made an interim award dated 10 April 2017 under Section 31(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') in favour of the appellant. Being aggrieved by the impugned interim award, the respondent has filed a petition under Section 34 of the Act before this Court (Arbitration Petition No. 393 of 2017). By an order dated 13 December 2017 the learned Single Judge has admitted the Section 34 petition. As mere admission of the petition would not amount to stay on the execution of the interim arbitral award, the respondent filed Notice of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....casting Co. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Parshuram Babaram Sawant (2011) 113 (6) Bom.L.R. 3801. 3. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the learned Single Judge has appropriately considered the factual matrix and correctly observed that the arbitral tribunal rendered the impugned interim award, based on a solitary paragraph in the written statement and did not at all consider the case of the respondent as pleaded in the written statement. It is his contention that the purported admission which is recorded in the impugned interim arbitral award was required to be considered in the context of the entire defence and the situation was not such that the purported admission can be singled out so as to make an interim award o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... impugned interim award. It would be appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the Arbitral Award which reads thus:- "4. The counsel for the plaintiff submits that the respondent has made an clear and unequivocal admission of liability to the tune of Rs. 47,56,388/- in Para No. 3(O) of the statement of defence and Para No. 23 of the counter claim. ...... ...... ..... 13. We find that in Para No. 3(O) of the statement of defense, it is very clear that the respondent has made an admission of liability of Rs. 47,56,388/-. 14. Since the respondent has made an admission of liability, we find that the Delhi High Court Judgment is applicable to the facts of the present case. Thus, the Plaintiff is entitled to an Interim Award in respe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gned interim award would clearly show that there is no reference whatsoever inter alia of the above contention as urged on behalf of the respondent. The case of the respondent in the written statement undoubtedly was required to be considered by the arbitral tribunal in its entirety and due consideration of the pleas as asserted by the respondent in the written statement. There is no reasoning whatsoever in the impugned interim award in rejecting the respondent's case as made out in the reply opposing the interim award. The learned Single Judge is thus correct in his observation that the Arbitral Tribunal has not considered the entire case as pleaded by the applicant in the written statement and that the respondents were entitled to exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o sub-section (3) stipulates that the Court while considering the application for grant of stay of an arbitral award for payment of money, shall have due regard to the provisions for grant of stay of a money decree under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. 10. A bare perusal of the provisions of Section 36 shows that the jurisdiction so conferred on the Court is a discretionary jurisdiction. The proviso to Sub-section (3) further makes it implicit that the provisions of Order 41 Rule 1 Sub-Rule 3 and Rule 5 would become relevant. In exercising powers under Order 41 Rule 5 the Court exercises its discretion and may grant a stay to the execution of a decree if "sufficient cause" is made out and the party seeking stay satisfie....