Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2016 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 1147 - SC - Companies LawDispute capable of adjudication and settlement by arbitration - Held that:- Only allegation of fraud that is levelled is that the Appellant had signed and issued a cheque of ₹ 10,00,050/- dated 17.06.2010 of 'Hotel Arunagiri' in favour of his son without the knowledge and consent of the other partners i.e. the Respondents. It is a mere matter of accounts which can be looked into and found out even by the arbitrator. It does not involve any complex issue. If such a cheque is issued from the hotel account by the Appellant in favour of his son, it is easy to prove the same and then the onus is upon the Appellant to show as to what was the reason for giving that amount from the partnership firm to his son and he will have to account for the same. Likewise, the allegation of the Respondents that daily collections are not deposited in the bank accounts is to be proved by the Respondents which is again a matter of accounts. Other allegation, which appears to be serious, is about the C.B.I. raid at the house of Dhanapalraj from where cash in the sum of ₹ 45 lakhs was seized. Interestingly, though the Appellant has taken the position that this cash belongs to 'Hotel Arunagiri', they are the Respondents who have themselves alleged that the money belonged to Dhanapalraj and not to 'Hotel Arunagiri'. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the Respondents/plaintiffs themselves, this issue does not fall for consideration and, therefore, is not to be gone by the Arbitral Tribunal. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the allegations of purported fraud were not so serious which cannot be taken care of by the arbitrator. The Courts below, therefore, fell in error in rejecting the application of the Appellant Under Section 8 of the Act. Reversing these judgments, we allow this appeal and as a consequence, application filed by the Appellant Under Section 8 in the suit is allowed thereby relegating the parties to the arbitration. Also consent by the other judge a mere allegation of fraud in the present case was not sufficient to detract from the obligation of the parties to submit their disputes to arbitration. A fresh line must be drawn to ensure the fulfilment of the intent of Parliament in enacting the Act of 1996 and towards supporting commercial understandings grounded in the faith in arbitration.
|