Ashok Leyland Finance v. Nilesh S. Mokashi & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 29 Jan 2007
- Bench
- D Y CHANDRACHUD
Outcome
Disposed of
directions, the appeal is disposed of with no order as
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Plain reading of the prayer clauses (a) and (b) in the arbitration petition obviously discloses relief in the nature of injunction against the respondents from disposing of and parting with possession as well as creating of third party rights and at the same time…
Judgment
It is settled law that in terms of the provisions of law comprised under Section 17 of the said Act, arbitrator is duly empowered to issue necessary interim orders as far as they relate to the parties to the proceedings. However, when the party approaches the Court in arbitration petition seeking relief against the third party in the nature of appointment of Court Receiver during the pendency of the proceedings, the provisions of law comprised under Section 17 do not empower arbitrator to grant any such relief to the party. The scope of powers of the arbitrator under Section 17 being of a limited nature and they cannot be exercised in relation to matters pertaining to third party or when the party approaches for the relief of [3] appointment of Court Receiver, it was necessary for the learned single Judge to consider this aspect of the matter as the appellant in the case in hand had also prayed for the relief in the nature of appointment of Court Receiver as well as for injunction to restrain the respondents from creating third party rights.
Operative part
Plain reading of the prayer clauses (a) and (b) in the arbitration petition obviously discloses relief in the nature of injunction against the respondents from disposing of and parting with possession as well as creating of third party rights and at the same time, under the clause (b) for appointment of Court Receiver in relation to the property in question. Since the impugned order nowhere discloses consideration of this aspect of the matter i.e. in relation to appointment of Court Receiver as also in relation to the third party rights which are sought to be created in the property in question, in the interest of justice it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order and to remand the matter to the learned single Judge for consideration of all these aspects, more particularly taking into consideration the scope of powers of arbitrator under the provisions of law comprised under Section 17 in comparison to that of the Court under Section 9 of the said Act. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on any of the issues [4] sought to be raised on merits of the case and all the issues are kept open for consideration by the learned single Judge. Liberty to the parties to move for expeditious disposal of the petition. With these directions, the appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. (Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.) sjs/j7a850.6 sjs/j7a850.6 sjs/j7a850.6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: directions, the appeal is disposed of with no order as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 9.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 29 Jan 2007. The bench was D Y CHANDRACHUD.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.