K.Vara Prasad v. M/S.Citicorp Finance (India)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 28.09.2020
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
1. Mr.K.Vara Prasad, S/o.Mr.K.Ramarao, Plot No.92, Madhava Nagar, Biramuliguda, Pst-Lal Bahadur, Secunderabad, Hyderabad-500 963.
2. Mrs.K.Vijayalaxmi, Plot No.92, Madhava Nagar, Karmanghat, LB Nagar, Secunderabad-500 059.
... Petitioners -Vs.-
1. M/s.Citicorp Finance (India) Limited, Rep. by its Manager-Legal, 1st Floor, Angson Centre, 153, Greams Road, Near Thousand Lights, Chennai-600 006.
2. Mr.K.S.Gowthaman, Sole Arbitrator, No.224-B, 4th Cross Street, Natesa Nagar, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092.
(R2 deleted in and by this order) .. Respondents This Original Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and 1/9
Conciliation Act, 1996, praying to set aside the award dated 17.03.2014 passed by the learned Arbitrator in Claim Petition No.KSG/CCFIL/2/2008 and allow the petition with exemplary cost.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Venkatavarathan For Respondent : Mr.S.Vasudevan ***
ORDER
Mr.R.Venkatavarathan, learned counsel on record for the two petitioners and Mr.S.Vasudevan, learned counsel on record for the contesting first respondent are before this virtual Court in a web hearing on a video conferencing platform.
2. To be noted, sole Arbitrator, who constituted the Arbitral Tribunal and made the impugned award, has been arrayed as second respondent, but second respondent will now stand deleted in and by this order.
3. Captioned Original Petition has been listed under the caption 'FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT' today.
4. Aforementioned two learned counsel on record make a common 2/9
submission in unison that the matter has been settled between the two petitioners and the sole respondent (now) and they have reduced the terms of Compromise to a 'Joint Memo of Compromise dated 15.09.2020' [hereinafter 'said Jt.MOC' for the sake of clarity and convenience].
5. Both learned counsel make two common requests in unison and they are as follows:
a.
Personal presence of the parties may please be dispensed with owing to virtual hearing;
b.
Said Jt.MOC has been email filed, a hard copy of the same has been placed before this virtual Court, necessary Court fee has also been paid and therefore, the same may be recorded.
6. In the light of the trajectory the matter has taken, considering the nature of the matter, aforesaid two requests are acceded to.
7. Both learned counsel submit in unison that on recording the said Jt.MOC, impugned award dated 17.03.2014 will stand substituted by Jt.MOC. However, in the light of Clause 4 of said Jt.MOC, impugned award will stand 3/9
revived in place of Jt.MOC, if the default clause kicks in and starts operating.
8. Scanned copy of said Jt.MOC is as follows: 4/9
5/9
6/9
7/9
9. Aforementioned Jt.MOC shall form part of the order. This Court is informed by both the learned counsel that the sole respondent has launched execution by way of EP.No.192 of 2017 in Rengareddy District Court in State of Telangana, but counsel for sole respondent undertakes to have the same withdrawn in the light of this Jt.MOC being recorded.
10. OP disposed of as settled on the aforementioned terms. There shall be no order as to costs.
28.09.2020 Speaking order: Yes/No Index: Yes / No kmi 8/9
M.SUNDAR, J.
kmi 28.09.2020 9/9