AURUM VENTURES PVT. LTD. Vs. HT MEDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In O.M.P.(COMM) 136/2024 and O.M.P.(COMM) 137/2024, filed under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ["the Act"], the petitioners challenge an arbitral award dtd. 18/12/2023, by which disputes between the parties, under a "Debenture Subscription Agreement" dtd. 30/12/2008 ["the DSA"], have been adjudicated. The learned arbitrator has made an award in favour of respondent No. 1, HT Media Ltd. ["HTM"], and against six entities, including the petitioners herein. The award is for a sum of Rs.7.5 crores, alongwith pre-award interest at the rate of 6% per annum, further interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and costs of Rs.20.00 lakhs. By way of I.A. 6812/2024 and I.A 6814/2024, the petitioners seek interim stay of the impugned award. [Notice was issued in these petitions on 5/4/2024. HTM entered appearance, and directions were given for service upon the other respondents. Although service upon the other respondents remained incomplete, the stay applications were taken up for hearing, as the impugned award is only in favour of HTM, and a decision on the applications will thus affect only the petitioners and HTM.]

(2.) The principal ground upon which the award is assailed by the petitioners is that they have erroneously been held to be bound by the DSA. It is their submission that the DSA has purportedly been signed on their behalf by one Mr. Siddhartha Srivastava ["SS"], who was neither an officer nor an employee of the petitioner-companies, and had no authority from the petitioner-companies to sign the DSA on their behalf. They contend that the learned arbitrator has erroneously held the petitioners to be bound by the DSA, on a finding of alleged ostensible authority of SS to sign the DSA on their behalf.

(3.) The description of the parties in the DSA consists of three parts: