Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2002 (6) TMI 556

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n that the Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to proceed with the arbitration in view of the fact that the reference before the BIFR regarding the petitioner-company was pending. It is contended that in view of the provisions of section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the Arbitrator must stay the arbitration proceedings as he has no jurisdiction to proceed in the matter. The Arbitrator, therefore, framed the following questions : "Whether the Respondents prove that the Learned Arbitrator has no jurisdiction to decide this Arbitration in view of the fact that BIFR reference of the Respondent Company is presently pending ?" Mr. Pooniwala, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, has raised a preliminar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the scope of its authority is raised during the arbitral proceedings. (4) The arbitral Tribunal may, in either of the cases referred to in sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), admit a later plea if it considers the delay justified. (5) The arbitral Tribunal shall decide on a plea referred to in sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) and, where the arbitral Tribunal takes a decision rejecting the plea, continue with the arbitral proceedings and make an arbitral award. (6) A party aggrieved by such an arbitral award may make an application for setting aside such an arbitral award in accordance with section 34." The section clearly empowers an arbitral Tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction vide sub-section (1). Where the arbitral Trib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on of the Arbitrator on the issue of jurisdiction is an interim arbitral award as contemplated by section 31(6). Section 31(6) reads as follows : "31. Form and contents of arbitral award. An arbitral award shall be made in writing and shall be signed by the members of the arbitral Tribunal. (2) to (5) ****** (6) The arbitral Tribunal may, at any time during the arbitral proceedings, make an interim arbitral award on any matter with respect to which it may make a final arbitral award." 4. I am unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the decision whether arbitration proceedings should be stayed or not can be a matter with respect to which the arbitral Tribunal may make a final arbitral award .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1972 SC 2379, it is clear that one of the meanings of the word "jurisdiction" is the power to adjudicate on the subject-matter. I am, therefore, of the view that the petitioner, who was the respondent in the arbitration, had questioned the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator to proceed to adjudicate the subject-matter of the claim and a decision on the Arbitrator whether to proceed with it or not amounts to a ruling on its own jurisdiction. 7. In this view of the matter, I am of the view that since admittedly no award is passed till date, the present petition under section 34 of the Act is not tenable and must be dismissed. Mr. Pooniwala, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, referred to a decision of Rebello, J. dated 3-5-2002 in Writ P .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd the award is made. If, on the other hand, it holds that it has no jurisdiction, an order can be challenged under sub-section (2) of section 37 of the Act." 10. The present petition is, therefore, dismissed. It is made clear that dismissal of this petition shall not disentitle the petitioner from raising all grounds as may be available to it in law while challenging the arbitral award when made. 11. Mr. Thakkar further submitted that there is no question of jurisdiction raised by the petitioner since the only right asserted by the petitioner was to have the proceedings before the Arbitrator stayed. In my view, for all practical purposes, what was being questioned was the power of the Arbitrator to proceed with and adjudicate the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates