Full Text
Translation output
t7 $-23 &.28 HIGH COURT OF DELHI - o.M.P. 22312012
M/S VEE KAY INDUSTRIDS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Advocatc with Mr. Dhiraj Sachdcva, Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Mr. Ankur Gosain and Mr. It.P. Singh, Advocates
M/S VEE KAY INDUSTRIDS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Advocatc with Mr. Dhiraj Sachdcva, Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Mr. Ankur Gosain and Mr. It.P. Singh, Advocates
VERSUS
Through: Mr. Jagjit Singh and Mr. Izhar Aharnad, Advocates for Northern I{aihvay
Mr. A.S. Sinha, Advocatc for Ministry of Ilailways
-r. o.M.P. l2I1l20I2 M/S VIIE KAY INDUSTIUES ""' Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Dhiraj Sachdeva, Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Mr. Ankur Gosain and Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocatcs
I.INION OF INDIA & ORS
Mr. A.S. Sinha, Advocatc for Ministry of Ilailways
-r. o.M.P. l2I1l20I2 M/S VIIE KAY INDUSTIUES ""' Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Dhiraj Sachdeva, Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Mr. Ankur Gosain and Mr. R.P. Singh, Advocatcs
I.INION OF INDIA & ORS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS..... Responclents ..... Respondents
Ttn'ough: Mr. Jagiit Singh and Mr. Izhat Ahamad, Advocatcs for Northem l{ailwaY
Mr. A.S. Sinha, Advocatc for Ministry of Railways
Ttn'ough: Mr. Jagiit Singh and Mr. Izhat Ahamad, Advocatcs for Northem l{ailwaY
Mr. A.S. Sinha, Advocatc for Ministry of Railways
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SI{AKDHER o.M.P. 22312012 & 121712012 page I of4
2013:DHC:8381 <)- "1 cl
30.08.2013 'fhese are petitions filed under Section 9 of thc Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). Ilven though several prayers have been made in the two petitions, rcfcrrcd to abovc, in substance Mr. Kapur says that the petitioner is secking restraint on the recovery / adjustrnent of further amounts by the respondents.
I had on 22.07 .2013 clirected thc partics to file a chart showing the following details :-
(D. 'Ihe total amount claimed;
(ii). Amount withheld by the respondents;
(iiD. The unsecured atnount in respect of which the security is sought by the respondents.
A chart has bcen filcd by Mr. Jagjit Singh, which shows, in respect of captioned pctitions, thc total recovery which the rcspondents are entitled to make under clausc 18.2 of the agreement, is a sum of Rs.2,33 ,61,0231-. The chart furthcr shows that the amount withheld is a sum of lts.I,07,83,5231-. The balancc according to Mr. Jagjit Singh, which is to be recovered is a sum of Its.I,25,77,5001-.
Furthermore, according to Mr. Jagjit Singh, respondents have security in the form of two bank guarantees of a total value of Rs.45
I-akhs.
Mr. A.S. Sinha, who appears for Ministry of Railways says that the total amount which the respondents arc claiming is a sum of
Rs.2,64,54,I87/- against which the amount withhcld by thc o.M.P. 22312012 & 121712012 page 2 of4
J) respondents is Its. I,I8,53,646/ -.
Mr. Singh who appears for the Northern Itailway and Mr. Sinha who appcars for thc Ministry of Railways say that two bank guarantecs in the total sum of lts.45 Lakhs are availablc as security.
In the background of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the lcarned counsel for the parties are agrced that captioned petitions can be disposed of with the following directions :-
(i). Since an arbitrator has been appointed, thcse petitions will be placed before him, who will treat the same as applications under
Scction 17 of the Act.
(ii). pending the disposal of the captioncd petitions / applications, the interim order dated 07.03.2012 passed in OMP 22312012 and intcrim order dated 2I.12.2012 passed in OMP 121712012 shall continue to operate till appropriate orders are passed by the learned
Arbitrator.
(iiD. 1he arbitrator will be free to vacate or rnodify or affirm or cven expand the scopc of the interim orders in accordancc with thc law.
(iu). the parties will be frec to refer their claims and counter claims, if any, before the learned Arbitrator, who shall dccide the samc in accordance with the law.
The captioned petitions are disposcd of with the aforesaid observations.
Needless to say, the learned arbitrator will be free to pass any order o.M.P. 223/2012 & 12t712012 page 3 of4
^L that he deems fit in the facts and circumstanccs of thc case after hearing both the parties.
Dasti.
-) ,r I '/ r \(^*\LJ-JI-./ -:
RAJIV SIIAKDHER, J AUGUST 30, 2013 vg o.M.P. 223/2012 & r2r7l20l2 page 4 of4
2013:DHC:8381 <)- "1 cl
30.08.2013 'fhese are petitions filed under Section 9 of thc Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). Ilven though several prayers have been made in the two petitions, rcfcrrcd to abovc, in substance Mr. Kapur says that the petitioner is secking restraint on the recovery / adjustrnent of further amounts by the respondents.
I had on 22.07 .2013 clirected thc partics to file a chart showing the following details :-
(D. 'Ihe total amount claimed;
(ii). Amount withheld by the respondents;
(iiD. The unsecured atnount in respect of which the security is sought by the respondents.
A chart has bcen filcd by Mr. Jagjit Singh, which shows, in respect of captioned pctitions, thc total recovery which the rcspondents are entitled to make under clausc 18.2 of the agreement, is a sum of Rs.2,33 ,61,0231-. The chart furthcr shows that the amount withheld is a sum of lts.I,07,83,5231-. The balancc according to Mr. Jagjit Singh, which is to be recovered is a sum of Its.I,25,77,5001-.
Furthermore, according to Mr. Jagjit Singh, respondents have security in the form of two bank guarantees of a total value of Rs.45
I-akhs.
Mr. A.S. Sinha, who appears for Ministry of Railways says that the total amount which the respondents arc claiming is a sum of
Rs.2,64,54,I87/- against which the amount withhcld by thc o.M.P. 22312012 & 121712012 page 2 of4
J) respondents is Its. I,I8,53,646/ -.
Mr. Singh who appears for the Northern Itailway and Mr. Sinha who appcars for thc Ministry of Railways say that two bank guarantecs in the total sum of lts.45 Lakhs are availablc as security.
In the background of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the lcarned counsel for the parties are agrced that captioned petitions can be disposed of with the following directions :-
(i). Since an arbitrator has been appointed, thcse petitions will be placed before him, who will treat the same as applications under
Scction 17 of the Act.
(ii). pending the disposal of the captioncd petitions / applications, the interim order dated 07.03.2012 passed in OMP 22312012 and intcrim order dated 2I.12.2012 passed in OMP 121712012 shall continue to operate till appropriate orders are passed by the learned
Arbitrator.
(iiD. 1he arbitrator will be free to vacate or rnodify or affirm or cven expand the scopc of the interim orders in accordancc with thc law.
(iu). the parties will be frec to refer their claims and counter claims, if any, before the learned Arbitrator, who shall dccide the samc in accordance with the law.
The captioned petitions are disposcd of with the aforesaid observations.
Needless to say, the learned arbitrator will be free to pass any order o.M.P. 223/2012 & 12t712012 page 3 of4
^L that he deems fit in the facts and circumstanccs of thc case after hearing both the parties.
Dasti.
-) ,r I '/ r \(^*\LJ-JI-./ -:
RAJIV SIIAKDHER, J AUGUST 30, 2013 vg o.M.P. 223/2012 & r2r7l20l2 page 4 of4
JUDGMENT