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

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more