TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1718
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for more than one year from the date of filing, must be decided within six months from today. The Registrar General(s) of the respective High Courts are directed to submit the compliance report on completion of six months from today. All endeavour shall be made by the respective High Courts to decide and dispose of the applications under Sections 11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration Act and/or any other like application at the earliest and preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of the applications." 2. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) for direction to the respondent No. 2 to constitute an Arbitral Tribunal as per its bye-laws, rules and regulations to adjudicate the claim of the petitioner against respondent No. 1 arising out of Clearing Member-Trading Member Agreement dated 07.11.2005. 3. In the present case, NSE on 30.04.2020 declared the respondent No. 1 - Trading Member as defaulter as per Bye-Law 1 (a) of Chapter XII of NSE Bye laws. Respondent No. 1 was expelled from the membership of NSE as per Rules 1 and 2 of Chapter IV of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....client/constituents. 7. It is the case of the respondents that only difference between the facts of Arbitration Petition No. 704/2017 and the present Arbitration Petition is that in that petition, the client/constituent of the defaulter and expelled trading member sought to invoke arbitration mechanism against the said member, under the Bye-laws of NSE. Whereas, in the present petition, the Clearing Member has sought to invoke the arbitration mechanism under the Bye-laws of NSE. However, it is the position in both the cases the arbitration is sought to be conducted with the defaulter and expelled trading member of NSE. Thus, it is submitted that issue involved in the present petition is in lis before Hon'ble Supreme Court, hence, this Hon'ble Court ought to adjudicate upon the present petition once the abovementioned Special Leave to Appeal is decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that stay of proceedings in another matter will not hamper the proceedings in the present petition and that this petition can be taken up for hearing on its merits. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g paras have been relied upon: "19. The Court is unable to agree with the above reasoning of the ITAT as it runs contrary to the well-settled legal position explained by the Supreme Court in several decisions. In Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of South India Trust Association (1992) 3 SCC 1, the effect of an interim order was explained as thus: "While considering the effect of an interim order staying the operation of the order under challenge, a distinction has to be made between quashing of an order and stay of operation of an order. Quashing of an order results in the restoration of the position as it stood on the date of the passing of the order which has been quashed. The stay of operation of an order does not, however, lead to such a result. It only means that the order which has been stayed would not be operative from the date of the passing of the stay order and it does not mean that the said order has been wiped out from existence." (emphasis supplied) XXXXXX "23. In the present case, with the Award having been made rule of the Court by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the mere fact that the said judgment and decree was sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in any manner the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment. 14. However, there is no denying the fact that when an order has been stayed by the superior Court, the operation of the said order is itself stayed. Thus, in the interregnum, when the stay order by superior Court is pending, it cannot be said that the order which has been stayed by the superior Court is in effect. Thus, on that account, the order which has been stayed by a superior Court cannot held to be in operation and cannot be followed during the period when the said order is under stay order by the superior Court. 15. This Court in the case of Alka Gupta vs. Medical Council of India (supra) has held as follows: "18. Mr. Rabin Majumder relied upon another judgment of Calcutta High Court in Pijush Kanti Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal HC, (2007) 2 CALLT wherein it has been held as under : - "10................Such interim order is binding upon the parties to the proceedings but the law is equally settled that by mere passing of an interim order staying the operation of a judgment with certain further conditions, the existence of the said judgment is not wiped out....