Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2018 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1396 - AT - Companies LawArbitration proceedings - main plea of the appellant in these appeals is that there is MOU dated 20.7.2011 between the parties and the clause 19 of the MOU clearly provides that the dispute can be referred to arbitration whereas the respondents argued that the so called MOU has already been cancelled vide letter dated 10.11.2011 and as on date it is not in existence - Held that:- A chart has been filed showing that who are the party to the MOU and the company petition. We have verified from the chart that some of the Company Appeal (AT) No.319, 320 and 321 of 2017 respondents are not party to the MOU but they are party in appeal. It shows that all the members are not signatory to the MOU. We find that neither all Members of the companies are party to the said MOU, nor the Companies were party to the MOU, nor the Companies adopted the MOUs. Even if it is assumed that the arbitration clause survives even after cancellation, as all respondents are not party to the MOU, therefore, the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction to pass an award in favour of a third party who is not party to the arbitration agreement. Further the appellants has not been able to produce the original agreement or a duly certified copy of the same as per Section 8(2) of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996. Again, the scope of petition under Section 397, 398 of the Old Act is much wider than what can be subject of arbitration. Appeal dismissed.
|