Full Text
Translation output
1l-'
$ s-l01
{, N THE HIGH COURT
+ ARB.P. 299t2012
PACL LIMITED
Through
OF' DELHI AT NEW DELHI..... Petitioner
Mr.Gautam Dhamija Adv
$ s-l01
{, N THE HIGH COURT
+ ARB.P. 299t2012
PACL LIMITED
Through
OF' DELHI AT NEW DELHI..... Petitioner
Mr.Gautam Dhamija Adv
VERSUS
MUCHELI SRIKANTH
Through None. ..... Respondent
Through None. ..... Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
18.03.2013
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section
11(6) of the A.r'bitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appoinhnent of an
Arbin'ator.
The case of the petitioner is that as per lettei dated 18th April, 2007 the respondent was appointed and placed hirn as Assistant Manager at
Nellore Branch of the petitioner. It was agreed, accepted and understood between the parties that all accounts pertaining to h'ansactions at any office/place of working shall be rendered at Corporate Office, Delhi. The respondent was confurned on 19d' March, 200'8. The respondent was posted as the pelson incharge of the Kharnmam office of the petitioner company.
He was responsible for safety and securiff of cash and other values of the petitioner for all the keys of the office/cash box were under the primary domain of the respondent. On 3'd March,2010 it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that cash amount of {16,33,000/- was found missing fiorn the
%
2013:DHC:8058
!l q
I
(. cupboald of the said office. The respondent did not make any complaint to the police in this regard. The concerned official of the petitioner'cornpany made a cornplaint to the police on coming to know the said facts. Due to the said conduct, the respondent was placed under suspension pending enqulry vide letter dated 17th July, 2010 and he was issued a charge sheet on 26't'
August, 20L0. The respondent replied to the charge sheet whereby he denied the allegations. After considering the totality of the circumstances, his services were terminated by letter dated 24tl' September, 2010.
During the course of enc1uiry, it was further revealed that the respondent had comrnitted finther manipulations in the cornpany by issuing bealer cheques in favour of customers/clients to the tune of 722 lacs. The respondent admitted his wrongdoing and issued an undertaking culn declaration dated 23'd September, 2010. It was found that sorne of the cheques so issued had been misused/misappropriated by the respondent On acconnt of dereliction of duties by the responden! on 28tl' December, 20IO the petitioner demanded a sum of 717;27,116l- from the respondent as the sarne wele rernained unpaid as books of the account of,the petitioner. Due to negligence, rnischievous, deliberate conduct, the petitioner had to suffer loss of cash. It is stated in the petition that in order to create a fiivolous defence, the respondent sent a letter dated 20tl' January, 2011 calling upon the petitioner to appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. By reply dated 5tl' March,20Il the petitioner accepted the request of the respondent for the appoinnnent of .an Arbitrator and appointed
Sh.S.M. Chopra, ADJ (Retd.) as sole Arbinator to adjudicate the disputes.
However, Sh.S.M. Chopra, ADJ (Retd.) refused to accept the reference.
Therefore, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner.
,, \0
. Notice of the petition was seryed to the respondent. On the last date learned counsel for respondent appeared. Today when the matter is taken, no one appeals on behalf of the respondent.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, Ms.Priya
Kunar, Advocate, (Mob. No.98 1 13 555 L2), B-47, Sector 40, Noida-20 130 1
(U.P.), is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate all the disputes and differences between the parties including their claims and counter.claims.
The fubitator shall conduct the proceedings under the provisions of the
Albitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall give prior notice before colrunencing the proceedings. Total fee of the learned Arbiu'ator is fixed at
<80,000/- which shall be bome by both the parties in equal proportion. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Copies of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties. A copy of the order be also communicated to the learned sole
Arbitrator. m0(d'htrK"+'1 MARCH 18,2013/jk k
18.03.2013
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section
11(6) of the A.r'bitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appoinhnent of an
Arbin'ator.
The case of the petitioner is that as per lettei dated 18th April, 2007 the respondent was appointed and placed hirn as Assistant Manager at
Nellore Branch of the petitioner. It was agreed, accepted and understood between the parties that all accounts pertaining to h'ansactions at any office/place of working shall be rendered at Corporate Office, Delhi. The respondent was confurned on 19d' March, 200'8. The respondent was posted as the pelson incharge of the Kharnmam office of the petitioner company.
He was responsible for safety and securiff of cash and other values of the petitioner for all the keys of the office/cash box were under the primary domain of the respondent. On 3'd March,2010 it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that cash amount of {16,33,000/- was found missing fiorn the
%
2013:DHC:8058
!l q
I
(. cupboald of the said office. The respondent did not make any complaint to the police in this regard. The concerned official of the petitioner'cornpany made a cornplaint to the police on coming to know the said facts. Due to the said conduct, the respondent was placed under suspension pending enqulry vide letter dated 17th July, 2010 and he was issued a charge sheet on 26't'
August, 20L0. The respondent replied to the charge sheet whereby he denied the allegations. After considering the totality of the circumstances, his services were terminated by letter dated 24tl' September, 2010.
During the course of enc1uiry, it was further revealed that the respondent had comrnitted finther manipulations in the cornpany by issuing bealer cheques in favour of customers/clients to the tune of 722 lacs. The respondent admitted his wrongdoing and issued an undertaking culn declaration dated 23'd September, 2010. It was found that sorne of the cheques so issued had been misused/misappropriated by the respondent On acconnt of dereliction of duties by the responden! on 28tl' December, 20IO the petitioner demanded a sum of 717;27,116l- from the respondent as the sarne wele rernained unpaid as books of the account of,the petitioner. Due to negligence, rnischievous, deliberate conduct, the petitioner had to suffer loss of cash. It is stated in the petition that in order to create a fiivolous defence, the respondent sent a letter dated 20tl' January, 2011 calling upon the petitioner to appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. By reply dated 5tl' March,20Il the petitioner accepted the request of the respondent for the appoinnnent of .an Arbitrator and appointed
Sh.S.M. Chopra, ADJ (Retd.) as sole Arbinator to adjudicate the disputes.
However, Sh.S.M. Chopra, ADJ (Retd.) refused to accept the reference.
Therefore, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner.
,, \0
. Notice of the petition was seryed to the respondent. On the last date learned counsel for respondent appeared. Today when the matter is taken, no one appeals on behalf of the respondent.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, Ms.Priya
Kunar, Advocate, (Mob. No.98 1 13 555 L2), B-47, Sector 40, Noida-20 130 1
(U.P.), is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate all the disputes and differences between the parties including their claims and counter.claims.
The fubitator shall conduct the proceedings under the provisions of the
Albitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall give prior notice before colrunencing the proceedings. Total fee of the learned Arbiu'ator is fixed at
<80,000/- which shall be bome by both the parties in equal proportion. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Copies of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties. A copy of the order be also communicated to the learned sole
Arbitrator. m0(d'htrK"+'1 MARCH 18,2013/jk k
JUDGMENT