Skip to main content

Disputes over fraud can be arbitrated, says Supreme Court

 Issues related to alleged fraud in business deals can be matter for arbitration, the Supreme Court has ruled, while referring a dispute between Swiss Timing and the organising committee of the 2010 Commonwealth Games over unpaid fees to an arbitral panel. The committee had withheld a part of payment due to the Swiss company after accusing it of obtaining the contract to provide timing, score and result systems for the games fraudulently in connivance with organising committee head Suresh Kalmadi.

Kalmadi, who is facing criminal cases along with some company officials over alleged irregularities, and Swiss Timing had denied any wrongdoing. Following the dispute, the company invoked the arbitration clause in the contract. It approached the Supreme Court after the committee refused to agree to arbitration. Swiss Timing also sought court intervention to set up an arbitral panel and named former Supreme Court judge SN Variava its nominee.

Justice SS Nijjar, who considered the company's petition, named Justices BP Singh and Kuldip Singh, both former judges of the top court, to the panel. Under the contract, the total payment to Swiss Timing was estimated at 24.99 million Swiss francs (about Rs 165 crore at current exchange rate). Of that, 5% was to be paid after the Commonwealth Games got over.

Swiss Timing sent an invoice of about 1.25 million francs to the committee on October 27, 2010. Neither that, nor another Rs 15 lakh it had deposited with the committee as earnest money, was paid by the committee, the company had said. In February 2011, the committee issued a statement saying that part payments to nine foreign vendors, including Swiss Timing, had been withheld for "nonperformance of contract".

The committee cited the cases against Kalmadi - under charges of cheating, criminal conspiracy to cheat and corruption - for the nonpayment and had accused some Swiss Timing executives of colluding with him. It claimed that Swiss Timing was liable to reimburse the payments already made, while saying that there was no basis to invoke arbitration.

The organising committee had also urged the court not to allow arbitration while the criminal case was underway. On the allegations against the company, which is accused of overbilling and manipulating the contract, Justice Nijjar said both these issues can be taken care of by arbitration.

 Article referred: http://www.samachar.com/Disputes-over-fraud-can-be-arbitrated-says-SC-of4eK8dijab.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more