Case Law Details
Vivek Mehta Vs KaRRs Designs & Developments (Bombay High Court)
In the present case, the MOU is executed on stamp paper of Rs.100/-. Thus, there is no question of the document being “unstamped”. It is at best insufficiently stamped and if a document is insufficiently stamped, then we have to consider the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in Intercontinental Hotels (supra) which takes into consideration the decision in Garware Wall Ropes, N.N. Global, Vidya Drolia, SMS Tea Estate (supra) and then concludes that while there is a need to constitute a larger bench to settle the jurisprudence taking cognizance of the time sensitivity of the matter, when dealing with arbitration issues, all matters which are still at pre-appointment stage, cannot be left hanging till the larger bench settles the issue and accordingly the court should ensure that until the larger bench decides on the interplay between Sections 11(6) and 16, that arbitrations are carried on, unless the issue before the court “patently indicates existence of deadwood”.
The deadwood concept has been dealt with extensively in Vidya Drolia (supra). Applying that test in Intercontinental Hotel Group (supra) the Supreme Court has made reference to the same in paragraph 18 as under;
“Usually issues of arbitrability/validity are matters to be adjudicated upon by arbitrators. The only narrow exception carved out was that Courts could adjudicate to ‘cut the deadwood’.”
SC Further Observed that unless the court comes to the conclusion that there is existence of deadwood, that the appointment procedure should be completed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
