Case title:
DCM Ltd V. M/S. Aggarwal Developers Pvt. Ltd and Ors
Date of Order:
31st October, 2023
Bench:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Mini Pushkarna
Parties:
Petitioner: DCM Ltd.
Respondent: Aggarwal Developers Pvt. Ltd and Ors
SUBJECT:
The agreements signed by the parties for the purchase, transfer, and sale of land in the villages of Mangar and Chakkarpur. Disagreements between the parties arose and were sent to the single arbitrator for resolution. The Court held that it is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996- Appealable orders
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996- Application for setting aside arbitral award
OVERVIEW
- The agreements signed by the parties on November 27, 1993, and December 13, 1994, for the purchase, transfer, and sale of land in the villages of Mangar and Chakkarpur, in the district of Gurgaon, Haryana, are the subject of the current dispute.
- As a result of the arbitration clause in their respective agreements, disagreements between the parties arose and were sent to the single arbitrator for resolution.
- The learned arbitrator determined that respondent no. 1 was entitled to reimburse the appellant for the amount of Rs. 8.05 crores that was advanced to it in the award dated July 12, 2019.
- But according to the experienced arbitrator, the appellant had forfeited its right to interest in accordance with a letter signed by Dr. Vinay Bharat Ram, therefore it was not entitled to any.
ISSUES RAISED
Whether the order passed by the arbitrator can be challenged in a court?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT
- The specific terms and conditions of the agreements between the parties are directly violated by the contested Award.
- The parties' agreements clearly stated that in the event that the respondents did not fulfil their end of the bargain, they would be required to return the advance money plus interest at the rate of 18% annually.
- The learned arbitrator committed a grave error when he refused to grant the appellant's claim for interest on the Rs. 8.05 crores that respondent no. 1 was found to have owed and receivable to the appellant.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- The Court decided that it has no desire to overturn the challenged decision made by the knowledgeable single judge. As a result, both the current appeal and the pending applications are dismissed.
- Based on the facts presented before the knowledgeable arbitrator, the conclusions made by the learned arbitrator are tenable.
- The Court will not revisit the evidence presented to the knowledgeable Arbitrator. It should be mentioned that this appeal is being made in accordance with Section 37 of the Arbitration Act.
- Section 37 of the Arbitration Act has even more restrictions on the scope of proceedings than Section 34 of the Act, and it is not comparable to the court's regular appellate jurisdiction.
CONCLUSION
The High Court of Delhi, in this case held that it would not interfere with the arbitrator's decision, dismissing the appeal and associated applications. The dispute revolved around agreements for land purchase and transfer, with the arbitrator ruling in favour of the respondent, denying the appellant's claim for interest on the sum owed. The Court, under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, emphasized the limited scope of its review, affirming the arbitrator's decision based on the presented evidence.
