LAFARGE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO
LAWS(CAL)-2017-1-49
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on January 10,2017

LAFARGE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
Kishore Kumar Sahoo Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Biswanath Somadder, J. - (1.) The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 5th August, 2014, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 7th Court at Alipore, District - South 24-Parganas, dismissing an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, being Misc. Case No.39 of 2012, taken out by Lafarge India Private Limited - the appellant herein - on the ground that the said application was not maintainable before it.
(2.) The genesis of the matter is that certain disputes and differences arose between the appellant and one Kishore Sahoo, who is a Commission Agent, during the course of their business transactions which gave rise to issuance of a notice dated 11th April, 2006, by Kishore Sahoo to the appellant requesting for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate certain disputes pertaining to an agreement dated 12th February, 2001. On 22nd May, 2006, Kishore Sahoo filed an application under section 11(6) before the Orissa High Court and by an order dated 9th March, 2007, a former Judge of the said High Court was appointed as the Sole Arbitrator. In the meanwhile, the appellant herein had filed an application before the Calcutta High Court on 17th August, 2006, under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. After the order was passed by the Orissa High Court on 9th March, 2007, in the section 11 application filed before it, an application was taken out by the appellant before the said Court on 7th September, 2007, seeking recall of the order dated 9th March, 2007, whereby a former Judge of the Orissa High Court was appointed as Arbitrator. That application was dismissed which resulted in filing of a SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by the appellant herein. The following order was passed by the Supreme Court on 25th March, 2009:- Leave granted. Without examining the various points urged, we feel interest of justice would be best served by appointing an arbitrator different from the one appointed by the High Court by the impugned order. It shall not be construed that we have expressed any opinion about competence of the concerned retired Judge who was appointed. But considering the nature of the controversy, it would be appropriate to appoint some other arbitrator. The parties have agreed that Shri H.L. Agarwal, retired Chief Justice of Orissa High Court be appointed as the arbitrator. The terms of the arbitration, fees, etc. shall be fixed by Justice Agarwal. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(3.) Subsequently, the arbitration proceedings took place and finally an award was passed by the learned Arbitrator on 12th December, 2011. The appellant herein preferred an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging the award dated 12th December, 2011. The said application, registered as Misc. Case No.39 of 2012, was filed on 3rd March, 2012, which was dismissed by the judgment and order dated 5th August, 2014, giving rise to the present appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.