1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.127 OF 2009 Suparna Chemicals Ltd. ...Petitioner. Vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. ...Respondents. Mr. H.H. Trivedi for the Petitioner. Mr. Rahul Mehta i/by M/s. KMC Legal Venture for the Respondents. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 30th JULY, 2009. P.C.- 1 The Petitioner has challenged the interim order dated 24th September, 2008, passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, moved under Section 31(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act). The basic portion of the award/ interlocutory order is as under:- “1 Heard the parties, respondent’s reply taken on record. 2 On behalf of the claimants interim award for sum of Rs. 57,84,136/- is sought. The basis is the loss assessed by the surveyor appointed by the respondents which a sum of Rs.3.3 Crore. Out of this a sum of Rs.1.7 Crore is paid and received by the claimants. 3 The respondents have resisted the application contending that the offer for payment was made by way of ‘compromise settlement’ and in full and final settlement of the claim. Since, the offer of compromise was not acceptable to the claimant. 2 Interim award could not be passed, as ask for because, it is not a case of undisputed amount. In the circumstances, since this is the disputed claim no interim award is passed.” 2 The learned Arbitral Tribunal, after considering the basic fact that the Petitioner is not ready to accept the full and final compromise settlement amount and therefore, not passed the interim award, as it is not the case of the admitted amount or undisputed amount. One cannot overlook the basic aspect of full and final settlement. The parties offer such amount to end the litigation fully and finally. This lump sum amount so offered, cannot be said to be undisputed amount for the purpose of granting such interim award, as claimed. Having once disputed and refused to accept this amount towards the full and final settlement of the claim, the detailed inquiry and trial is essential. It is difficult to accept the case of the Petitioner that it is the undisputed amount and that should be awarded, as done in the other cases. Considering the scope of Section 34 of the Act, I see there is no reason to interfere with the impugned interim order. The Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. 3 The parties are ready to co-operate for early disposal of the matter. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)