Bombay Highest Judge Upholds Arbitration Despite Parallel SARFAESI Process
Contributor
During the Tata Money Ltd. v. Priyanka Communications (India) Pvt. Ltd. 1 , this new Bombay Large Judge addressed a serious situation about your interplay ranging from arbitration clauses and statutory remedies offered below unique rules including just like the SARFAESI Work additionally the Recuperation off Costs On account of Finance companies and you can Financial institutions Act (“RDDB Operate”). Brand new Highest Court reaffirmed your initiation out of statutory process under these types of laws and regulations does not instantly void an enthusiastic arbitration agreement, except if expressly banned of the law.
The fact on it an economic dispute between Tata Capital Ltd. (“brand new Applicant”) and you may Priyanka Correspondence (India) Pvt. Ltd. (“Respondent Zero. 1”), who had availed some financing establishment on the Applicant. The argument based on perhaps the arbitration clause in an effective 2019 Sanction Letter between the parties remained appropriate inspite of the lingering legal cures initiated by the Tata Financing underneath the SARFAESI Act.
Inside 2015, Respondent No. 1, Priyanka Correspondence, covered multiple loan organization from Tata Money to generally meet its doing work money standards. A working capital Request Mortgage (WCDL) regarding INR 31 crores is actually provided when you look at the 2017, shielded of the personal pledges away from Participants dos and you can 3, brand new administrators out of Respondent Zero. 1. Typically, the borrowed funds try renewed a few times, that have Tata Money best an excellent consortium away from other lenders.
Inside the 2019, an additional mortgage business of INR 5.6 crores was sanctioned because of a separate Approve Letter, including an enthusiastic arbitration condition stating that one conflict due to the fresh new contract would be resolved through arbitration inside Mumbai. Continue reading
Recent Comments