NDLI: M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited Vs. M. Shashikala and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996– s.34
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996– s.34 – Scope of – Appellant advanced a loan of Rs.50,00,000/- to respondent no.1 – Respondent nos.2, 4 and 5-8 were the guarantors – Loan secured by mortgage with deposit of title deeds and respondent no.1 is also said to have executed a demand promissory note for repayment of the loan – Arbitration clause in the agreement to resolve dispute between the parties – Allegedly, respondent no.1 did not repay the loan – Dispute referred to arbitration to the third respondentArbitrator – Arbitrator inter alia directed the respondents to pay Rs.63,82,802/- with interest – Respondent no.1 filed AS No.1 of 2008 u/s.34 in the Court of District Judge – Respondent nos.1 & 2 also filed application u/s.151, CPC to permit the respondents to adduce evidence – Dismissed – High Court directed the District Judge inter alia to allow respondent nos.1 & 2 to file affidavits of their witnesses and further allow their cross-examination – On appeal, held: Proceedings u/s.34 are summary in nature and not in the nature of regular suit – Scope of enquiry in the proceedings u/s.34 is restricted to a consideration whether any of the grounds mentioned in s.34(2) or s.13(5) or s.16(6) are made out to set aside the award – Grounds for setting aside the award are specific – s.34 application will not ordinarily require anything beyond the record that was before the arbitrator and cross-examination of persons swearing in to the affidavits should not be allowed unless absolutely necessary – In the present case, no ground was made out as to the necessity/relevance of adducing evidence and what was the nature of the evidence sought to be led by respondent nos.1 & 2 – In the arbitration proceedings, the parties had sufficient opportunity to adduce oral and documentary evidence – Grounds urged in the application can very well be considered by the evidence adduced in the arbitration proceedings and considering the arbitral award – High Court did not keep in viewthat respondent nos.1 & 2 did not make out grounds that it was an exceptional case to permit them to adduce evidence in the application u/s.34 – Impugned judgment set aside – Order of the District Judge dismissing the application u/s.151, CPC in AS No.1 of 2008, affirmed – District Judge to take up AS No.1 of 2008 and dispose of expeditiously, in accordance with law – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.151 – High Court of Karnataka Arbitration (Proceedings before the Courts) Rules, 2001 – r.4(b) – Constitution of India – Arts. 226 and 227 – Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019.Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.34(5), (6) – Held: By adding sub-ss.(5) & (6) to s.34, the Act has specified the time period of one year for disposal of the application u/s.34 – Object is to avoid delay and to dispose of the application expeditiously – Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015.
Judge	Hon'ble Ms. Justice R. Banumathi
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 1068
Petitioner	M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited
Respondent	M. Shashikala And Others
SCR	[2019] 15 S.C.R. 637
Judgement Date	2019-09-23
Case Number	7544

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited Vs. M. Shashikala and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

M/s Hindustan Construction Company Limited Vs. M/s National Highways Authority of India

Haryana Tourism Limited Vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited

Indian Railway Construction Company Limited Vs. M/s National Buildings Construction

Commissioner, M.p. Housing Board and Others Vs. M/s. Mohanlal and Company

M/s Emkay Global Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Girdhar Sondhi

Gyan Prakash Arya Vs. M/s Titan Industries Limited

M/s. Bhandari Udyog Limited Vs. Industrial Facilitation Council and Anr.

Delhi Development Authority Vs. M/s R.s. Sharma & Co., New Delhi

M/s. Harsha Constructions Vs. Union of India & Ors.

M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited Vs. M. Shashikala and Others

M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited Vs. M. Shashikala and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

M/s Hindustan Construction Company Limited Vs. M/s National Highways Authority of India

Haryana Tourism Limited Vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited

Indian Railway Construction Company Limited Vs. M/s National Buildings Construction

Commissioner, M.p. Housing Board and Others Vs. M/s. Mohanlal and Company

M/s Emkay Global Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Girdhar Sondhi

Gyan Prakash Arya Vs. M/s Titan Industries Limited

M/s. Bhandari Udyog Limited Vs. Industrial Facilitation Council and Anr.

Delhi Development Authority Vs. M/s R.s. Sharma & Co., New Delhi

M/s. Harsha Constructions Vs. Union of India & Ors.

M/s. Canara Nidhi Limited Vs. M. Shashikala and Others