Arbitrator – Appointment – No law for Re-invocation of arbitration agreement for fresh application – Unstamped loan documents containing settlement of disputes by arbitration
Judgment dated 28.7.2023 of the High Court of Bombay
Arbitrator – Appointment – No law for Re-invocation of arbitration agreement for fresh application – Unstamped loan documents containing settlement of disputes by arbitration
Judgment dated 28.7.2023 of the High Court of Bombay
Applicant – a finance company – had given loan of Rs.90,66,393/- to the respondents for working capital only and on the execution of the loan application dated 25.10.2019 and other documents.
The settlement of disputes provided for amicable settlement in the first instance and thereafter, sole arbitrator to be appointed by the applicant.
The loan instalments were not paid and the respondents did not settle the disputes amicably. The applicant invoked arbitration vide notice dated 14.9.2020 and appointed Arbitrator. The respondents filed application under Section 13 of the AA challenging the legality of appointment of Arbitrator by the applicant.
However, the applicant had withdrawn the said proceedings with liberty to file afresh. The Arbitrator allowed withdrawal and terminated proceedings on 29.1.2022 with liberty.
Thereafter, the applicant filed present application for appointment of Arbitrator.
The respondents opposed the application mainly on the grounds (i) the agreement is unstamped and (ii) second application for Arbitrator is not maintainable since fresh notice invoking arbitration was not given.
HELD that there is no law or provision for re-invocation of arbitration agreement and the second application on the basis of earlier notice dated 14.9.2020 invoking arbitration is maintainable. However, the unstamped documents were unstamped and to be sent to the Authority for stamping.
Commercial Arbitration Application (L) No.8568 of 2022 -Aditya Birla Finance Ltd Vs. MVR Gas and others
