Pravin Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Galaxy Infra And Engineering Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
Summary: The Supreme Court partly interfered with the Delhi High Court’s order in a Section 11(6) proceeding arising from a disputed Consultancy Agreement dated 07/07/2014. The respondent claimed that the agreement contained an arbitration clause and that correspondence between the parties established a concluded consultancy arrangement. The appellant denied executing the agreement, disputed the signature attributed to its Managing Director and relied heavily on the CFSL report, which was unable to express an opinion on authorship of the questioned signatures. The Court examined the limited scope of judicial scrutiny at the referral stage under Sections 8 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, particularly after the 2015 amendments. Referring extensively to Mayavati Trading (P) Ltd. v. Pradyuat Deb Burman and Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corporation, it reiterated that referral proceedings involve a prima facie review and are not intended to become a mini trial.
Where disputed facts concerning formation, existence or validity of an arbitration agreement require deeper examination, those questions should ordinarily be left to the Arbitral Tribunal. On the facts, the Court found several unresolved circumstances. The CFSL report was inconclusive; negotiations and exchange of a draft agreement occurred after the date on which the alleged final agreement was said to have been executed; the alleged agreement was notarised in Haryana despite the parties being based in Mumbai and Bihar; the notary’s licence had expired; invoices and payments relied upon by the High Court involved Process Construction and Technical Services Pvt. Ltd.; and emails dated 22/07/2014 and 25/07/2014 were produced for the first time before the Supreme Court.
