Destimoney Securities Private v. Nalina.M.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 02.09.2020
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR O.P.No.78 of 2016 & O.P.No.81 of 2016 & O.P.No.78 of 2016 Destimoney Securities Private limited By its Director Having its registered office at phoenix House, B wing, 2nd floor, Senspati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (w) Mumbai 400 013 ....Petitioner Vs
1. Ms Nalini M Residing at No 3/155, Anbalayan, Thayappa Nagar, Koyambedu Tirupattur, Vellore 635601
2. Mr G Prabakar, Sole Arbitrator, Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to set aside the award dated 12.08.2015 1/6
O.P.No.81 of 2016 Destimoney Securities Private limited By its Director Having its registered office at phoenix House, B wing, 2nd floor, Senspati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (w) Mumbai 400 013 ... Petitioner Vs.
1. Mr Thangakkani G Residing at No 37/C, Selva Nagar, Thiyagadurgam, Kallakuruchi TK, Villupuram 606206 Tamilnadu State
2. Mr C Madasamy, Sole Arbitrator, Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to set aside the award dated 05.08.2015 Destimoney Securities Private limited By its Director Having its registered office 6th Floor, A-Wing, Tech Web Centre, Oshwara New Link Road Jogeshwari- West, Mumbai 400102 Vs.
2/6
1. Ms Radhika D Residing at No 37/C, Selva Nagar, Thiyagadurgam, Kallakuruchi, Villipuram 606 206 Tamilnadu State
2. Mr N Chandrasekaran, Sole Arbitrator, Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to set aside the award dated 12.08.2015 In all OPs For Petitioner :
Mr.Kunal Katariya assisted by Ms.Lucy Massey for Ms.Srinidhi Srinivasan For 1st Respondent :
Mr.K.Thilageswaran in all OPs COMMON ORDER Captioned 'Original Petitions' ('OPs' in plural and 'OP' in singular for the sake of brevity) were listed under the caption 'FOR FINAL DISPOSAL / ARGUMENTS' today.
2. Petitioner Company is the same in all three OPs. Mr.Kunal Katariya, learned counsel assisted by Ms.Lucy Massey, on behalf of counsel on record Ms.Srinidhi Srinivasan was before me on behalf of 3/6
petitioner in all three OPs. Contesting first respondent are three different individuals in three captioned OPs and Mr.K.Thilageswaran, learned counsel on record for contesting first respondent in all three OPs is before me. Mr.Pandoo Naig, who was identified by counsel for petitioner as C.E.O. of the petitioner company also joined the hearing. To be noted, three different individuals being arbitrators who made the respective impugned awards in the OPs have been arrayed as second respondent in the concerned OPs.
3. In this listing, which is a web-hearing i.e., virtual hearing on a video-conferencing platform, learned counsel for petitioner sought leave to withdraw captioned OPs. Counsel on record Ms.Srinidhi Srinivasan email filed a common memo of withdrawal, copy of which is as follows: 'MEMO The Petitioner submits as follows:
The Petitioner seeks to withdraw the Petition- O.P. No. 78/2016,OP 81/2016 and OP 264/2016 before the Honourable Madras High Court with Liberty to file appropriate arbitral proceedings. Dated at Chennai on this the 2nd September 2020 Counsel for Petitioner'
4/6
4. Learned counsel for petitioner while seeking leave to withdraw captioned OPs made a plea that the rights, if any, of both parties under National Stock Exchange of India Limited, bye-laws and more particularly, Chapter XI therein captioned 'ARBITRATION', may please be preserved.
5. Though the memo of withdrawal talks about liberty to file appropriate arbitral proceedings, this Court, without expressing any opinion or view on the same, permits the petitioner to withdraw captioned OPs albeit merely preserving the rights, if any of the petitioner and contesting first respondent under National Stock Exchange of India Limited, bye-laws and more particularly, Chapter X1 therein captioned 'ARBITRATION'.
All three OPs will stand dismissed as withdrawn preserving the rights of the parties to the limited extent mentioned supra. There shall be no order as to costs.
02.09.2020 5/6
gpa/sgl M.SUNDAR.J., gpa/sgl 02.09.2020 6/6