{1} aa0911.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.09 OF 2011 1 Mahavirchand s/o Suganchand Deoda, age: 62 years, Occ: Business, Resident of Khinvsara Park, Garkheda Area, Aurangabad. 2 Dharmendra s/o Mahavirchand Deoda, age: 36 years, Occ: Business, resident of as above. Appellants Versus 1 Ashaykumar s/o Bhavarsing Parakh, age: 27 years, Occ: Business, Resident of 10/11, Manik Towers, Viraj Colony, Canada Corner, Nasik, through constituted Power of Attorney holder - Bhavarsing s/o Vardhaman Parakh, age: 63 years, Occ: Business, resident of 10/11, Manik Towers, Viraj Colony, Canada Corner, Nasik. 2 Parasmal s/o Mohanlal Dungarwal, age: 72 years, Occ: Business, resident of House No.10/2/172, “Vrushab Kunj”, Road No.1, West Maradpalli, Secunderabad-500 026 (Andhra Pradesh). 3 Premchand s/o Sughanchand Deoda, age: 65 years, Occ: Legal Practitioner, resident of M/s Sheetal Wears, Besides `M/s Paras’ Raymond Retail Shop, Adalat Road, {2} aa0911.odt Aurangabad. 4 Sow Surekha w/o Nemichand Deoda, age: 50 years, Occ: Household, Resident of `M/s Sugan’, Aurangpura, Aurangabad. 5 Sow Jayshreebai w/o Rajendrakumar Deoda, age: years, Occ: Household, resident of 12, Samrat Colony, West Marradpalli, Secunderabad-500 026 (A.P.) 6 Smt.Veenadevi w/o Gautamchand Jain, age: 48 years, Occ: Household and business, Resident of House No.10/2/172, `Vrushab Kunj’ Road No.1, West Maradpalli, Secunderabad-500 026 (Andhra Pradesh). 7 Sanjay s/o Rameshchand Lunawat, age: 39 years, Occ: Business, Resident of B-36, Bhokardan Road, Jalna. 8 M/s Paras, Raymond Retail Shop, a Partnership Firm, Adalat Road, Aurangabad. Respondents Mr.D.V.Soman, advocate for Appellants. Mr.S.G.Ladda, advocate for respondent no.1. Mr.A.P.Bhandari, advocate for Respondent No.7. CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 29 th June, 2011 {3} aa0911.odt ORAL ORDER: 1 Appellants herein are raising exception to the order passed by Arbitral Tribunal on 11.05.2011. 2 Appellants and respondents are the partners of a partnership firm named and styled as `M/s Paras’ and dealing in the business of sale of clothes manufactured by Raymond Mills on retail basis. There arose certain differences between the partners, which led to filing of an application by respondent no.1 herein, being Arbitration Application No.03 of 2008, seeking appointment of Arbitrator to resolve disputes and differences between the parties. Considering the arbitration agreement incorporated in the Deed of Partnership, this Court directed appointment of panel of arbitrators. The panel consists of two Chartered Accountants – each one suggested by either of the parties and a Presiding Arbitrator is appointed by this Court from amongst the names of retired High Court Judges suggested by both the parties. Shri Justice N.P.Chapalgaonkar, retired Judge of this Court, is appointed as Presiding Arbitrator of the arbitral tribunal. The Arbitral Tribunal entered into arbitration and Respondent No.1 presented statement of claim before the Arbitral Tribunal wherein he has made following prayers: A The claim of the claimant be kindly allowed with costs against the person and properties of the respondents; and B The firm be ordered to be dissolved and all the assets and properties of the firm be distributed {4} aa0911.odt amongst the partners of the firm as per their respective shares in the firm; and C The accounts of the firm from the date of its incorporation till the date be kindly taken from the respondent nos.1 7 2 and the said respondents be ordered to render the true, correct and truthful accounts, and for the purposes independent and impartial auditor be kindly appointed to conduct detailed audit of the firm and thereby finalize the accounts of the firm correctly; and D The claimant be awarded an amount of Rs. 3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores) being his 22 ½ % share after taking the accounts of the firm from the respondents. E The good will of the firm be calculated and the claimant be awarded Rs.45,00,000/- (Rs.Forty Five Lacs) being his 22 ½% share from the amount of good will; and F The claimant be awarded an additional amount of Rs.54,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Four Lacs) from the respondents as damages, and G The claimant be awarded an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs) being the amount of {5} aa0911.odt expenditure incurred by him till the date of presentation of this claim for prosecuting the cause; and he be awarded further amount which he may be required to incur as expenditure for the purposes of the present arbitration proceedings. H The claimant be awarded the entire costs and expenses of the present proceedings against the respondents; and I The claimant be awarded future interest on all the aforesaid claimed amounts @ 18% p.a. Against the respondents from 1st of April, 2007 onwards till the full and final realization of the claimed amounts from the respondents; and Any other further and additional relief also be awarded to the claimant to which he may be found entitled for and oblige. 3 Written Statement has been presented by the appellants herein and other respondents controverting the claim lodged by Respondent No.1 herein and a prayer is made for rejection of the claim. The procedure in respect of presentation of claim and filing of written statement is completed as long back in June-2010. 4 An application came to be presented by Respondent No.1 herein extending a request for appointment of a qualified Chartered {6} aa0911.odt Accountant for the purposes of undertaking internal audit of the firm. It is averred in paragraph nos. 5 to 11 of the application, as noted below: 5 Considering all the aforesaid the claimant was constrained to file the petition U/Sec.9. The petition was prepared and filed on 16.10.2007 before the District Judge, Aurangabad. The said petition was registered as MARJI No.392/2007. By way of the said petition, the petitioner prayed for interim measures pending the appointment of the arbitrator, commencement and completion of the arbitration proceedings, passing of the final award by the arbitrator and execution of the award. 6 That the claimant says and submits that the Hon’ble Principal District Judge, Aurangabad directed the notices. The respondents appeared and proceeded to protract the matter on one or the other pretext. The respondent nos.1 & 2 had produced compact disk along with its copy to the claimant in the District Court, Aurangabad during the proceedings of MARJI No.392/2007 contending that it contains the data of the business firm. It was allegedly containing a data for the period of the financial year 2006-2007 and for the year 2007 till 5.00 p.m. Of January, 2008 and under the signature of one of the said respondents. However, the C.D. did not contain any data and it was not {7} aa0911.odt capable of being read. The Hon’ble District Court was pointed about this fact. Despite this no other compact disc was granted. The claimant says and submits that the respondent nos.1 A& 2 did not submit or supplied complete and true books of accounts. Even the alleged papers purporting to be the copies of the books of accounts which the respondent nos.1 & 2 submitted during the proceedings of MARJI No.392/2007 were incomplete and truly speaking untruthful and misleading. 7 Thus it is clear that the said respondents wanted to hide the things. The Hon’ble District Judge time to time pending the final decision passed interim orders. The claimant says and submits in pursuance to the interim orders passed by the Hon’ble District Court, Aurangabad he had tried to take inventory of the stock by visiting the shop on 24.11.2007 at about 11.00 a.m. However, the respondent nos.1 & 2 had already called the policemen. With the help of police the respondents were not allowed to seat in the shop and have the inventory of the stock. The policemen took the claim and his father to the police station Krantichowk, Aurangabad where they were issued notice U/Sec.149 of Cr.P.Code saying that the respondent no.2 has filed an application against them on 24.11.2007. {8} aa0911.odt 8 Considering the attitude exhibited by the respondent nos.1 & 2 the claimant had to institute execution proceeding bearing R.D.No.11/2009 in the District Court, Aurangabad. In the said proceedings application Exh-25 was filed by the present claimant since it was necessary to appoint a Chartered Accountant, who can take the physical inventory by checking all the documents, papers, books of accounts and the data about the stock, sale, etc. contained in the computer of the shop. The Hon’ble District Judge, Aurangabad, was pleased to appoint Mr.Ramniwas Malpani, a Chartered Accountant to help the present claimant in the work of verification of stock and account books as per the order dated 27.08.2009 passed by the Principal District Judge, Aurangabad in R.D. No. 11/2009 arising out of MARJI No.392/2007. However, the order has not been obeyed. 9 That the claimant says and submits that the Respondent nos.1 & 2 apprehending that their misdeeds would be taken to the task by the court and law therefore they in connivance with their relatives started a show room shop named as `The Raymond Shop at plot no.300, CIDCO N-3, on Jalna Road at Aurangabad. The intention behind this is nothing but to dislodge the unaccounted stock, {9} aa0911.odt money belonging to the Claimants Partnership Firm. Even some of the employees from the claimants Firm i.e. M/s Paras were shifted to the said new shop. The invitation card about the opening of the said new shop was sent to the father of the claimant through post. 10 That the claimant says and submits that audit of the Firm is done by Shri Ravi Chajed & Associates a chartered accountant of Aurangabad. The claimant time and again requested the said chartered accountant and also to the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 to grant him copies of the audit reports of the firm for the period of the accounting year 01-04-2008 to 31-03-2009. Several letters-cum- notices through post were also sent to the C.A. As well the respondents. Yet no copies have been granted to the claimant by any of them although the claimant was ever ready to pay the requisite charges and expenses required for grant and issue of the copies. The claimant submits that he and his father time and again had been to the office of the said Chartered Accountant, but each time he told that the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 have specifically asked him not to grant any copies of any of the documents of accounts of the firm to the claimant or his father. The claimant says and submits that this would make it clear that the said respondents have taken {10} aa0911.odt every care to keep the accounts, its summary and/or its audit reports, balance sheets etc., away from him. The claimant says and submits that the said Chartered Accountant has committed serious breach of the code of the practice conduct. The claimant has got every reason to apprehend that the said C.A. must not have audited the accounts of the Firm scrupulously and must have prepared his audit report without physically and actually counting the stock lying in the premises of the Firm and he must have done so at the behest of the Respondent nos.1 & 2. 11 The claimant time and again had also made similar requests to the Respondent nos.1 & 2 as were made to the above said Chartered Accountant, about grant of copies of the audit reports to him. However, no heed has been paid to his requests. The prayers made in the application are quoted as below: A This application be kindly allowed with costs; and B A qualified auditor preferably a Chartered Accountant be appointed as internal auditor and he be directed to conduct through internal audit of the {11} aa0911.odt firm and submit his detailed report to this tribunal within a specified time for which schedule be kindly fixed; and C The appointed internal auditor be kindly permitted to seek the help and services of the persons who are expert and qualified in computer technology; and D The respondent nos.1 & 2 be directed and ordered to supply and give all the books of accounts, documents, data and all such other facilities and assistance together with the requirements of the items listed in Annexure XX (which is marked and detailed in the main claim petition) which may be required by the auditor or his associates for the purposes of conducting the internal audit of the firm and / or the computer data etc; and E The claimant and/or his representatives be kindly permitted to remain present during the entire process and completion of the internal audit in the premises of the firm; 5 After extending an opportunity of hearing to the parties, the Arbitral Tribunal unanimously decided that an independent auditor, preferably a practicing chartered accountant, be appointed to audit the {12} aa0911.odt books of accounts to verify correctness of allegations of the financial irregularities alleged by the Claimant. It was, thus, directed to appoint one Shri R.B.Chandak, Chartered Accountant to conduct audit of books of accounts of the firm M/s Paras, for the financial years 2005-2006 to 2010-2011. It was clarified that the appointed Chartered Accountant is authorized to call for and audit all related books of accounts, software data, records, documents, invoices, bills, bank statements, verify stock in trade, as he may consider necessary. The auditor is required to report on the true and fair view of the financial statements submitted by the respondents, keeping in view the allegations made by the claimant i.e. Respondent No.1 herein. It was directed to the auditor to complete the audit within a period of one month. It was also directed to the auditor to submit internal report, in case of delay in completion of audit for any reason. The claimant / respondent no.1 herein was directed to deposit an advance of Rs.1.00 lac with the said auditor, which appears to have been deposited. It is noted in the order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal that the directions are issued under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 6 Shri Soman, learned Counsel appearing for appellants, vehemently contended that the directions issued by the Arbitral Tribunal are not in consonance with Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. It is contended that the directions issued are not in the nature of interim measures, as such, ought not to have been issued. Shri Soman invited my attention to Section 17 of the Act, which reads thus: 17 Interim measures ordered by arbitral tribunal- {13} aa0911.odt (1) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of a party, order a party to take any interim measure of protection as the arbitral tribunal may consider necessary in respect of the subject-matter of the dispute. (2) The arbitral tribunal may require a party to provide appropriate security in connection with a measure ordered under sub-section (1). 7 It is contended that direction can be issued under Section 17 to a party to take interim measure of protection as the arbitral tribunal may consider necessary. In the instant matter, no such directions are issued to the party to take interim measure of protection. As such, according to learned Counsel for appellants, order passed by the arbitral tribunal, being beyond the scope of Section 17 of the Act, is liable to be set aside. It is further contended that accounts of the firm are being audited since 1998 with the consent of the parties and as such, there was no necessity for appointing independent auditor. It is further contended that there is no prima facie material to show anything as regards practicing of fraud at the instance of appellants. It is also contended that without reaching a prima facie conclusion as regards allegations made against appellants, the tribunal ought not to have resorted to making appointment of independent auditor to examine accounts of the firm. 8 Shri Ladda and Shri Bhandari, learned Counsel appearing for Respondents No.1 & 7, have supported the order passed by the {14} aa0911.odt Tribunal. It is pointed out by the Counsel appearing for respondents that the application presented to the arbitral tribunal does not disclose that same is presented by invoking powers under Section 17 of the Act. Learned Counsel for Respondents No.1 & 7 have invited my attention to Section 26 of the Act and contended that the arbitral Tribunal does have power to appoint one or more experts to report to it on specific issues to be determined by the arbitral tribunal. Section 26 of the Act reads thus: 26 Expert appointment by arbitral tribunal – (1) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may- (a) appoint one or more experts to report to it on specific issues to be determined by the arbitral tribunal, and (b) require a party to give the expert any relevant information or to produce, or to provide access to, any relevant documents, goods or other property for his inspection. (2) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, if a party so requests or if the arbitral tribunal considers it necessary, the expert shall, after delivery of his written or oral report, participate in an oral hearing where the parties have the opportunity to put questions to him and to present expert witnesses in order to testify on the points at {15} aa0911.odt issue. (3) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the expert shall, on the request of a party, make available to that party for examination all documents, goods or other property in the possession of the expert with which he was provided in order to prepare his report. 8 Considering tenure of the order passed by the Tribunal, it does make reference to Section 17 of the Act, but it does not appear to be an order within fore corners of Section 17, however, directions issued by the Tribunal are referrable to Section 26(1)(a) of the Act. Learned Counsel for appellants has rightly pointed out that the order passed by the Tribunal directing appointment of an auditor to examine the accounts cannot be construed as an interim measure, as contemplated by Section 17 of the Act. It is also noted that the order passed by the Tribunal is not in the nature of direction to a party to take any interim measure of protection. The Tribunal appears to have committed an error in quoting Section 17 in the order. However, if the order is read in its entirety, it would disclose that the directions are of a nature, which can be issued by the Tribunal by taking recourse to Section 26 of the Act. Merely for the reason of misquoting of the Section, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be said to have been vitiated. It is to be noted that the dispute raised before the arbitral tribunal is in respect of maintenance of accounts of the partnership firm. The claimant / Respondent No.1 herein has made serious allegations in respect of maintenance of accounts by the managing partners. The arbitral {16} aa0911.odt tribunal consists of two Chartered Accountants. All the three members of the arbitral tribunal have unanimously decided to appoint an independent auditor for the purposes of verification of the accounts of the firm. The tribunal is expected to acquaint themselves with all the details in respect of functioning of the firm including financial statements and other necessary details. In order to elicit information and collect data with a view to pass final award in the matter, the tribunal is justified in making appointment of an independent auditor. The order passed by the Tribunal directing appointment of an independent arbitrator is a step-in-aid in determining the issues raised before the Tribunal. In order to effectively and correctly decide issues raised by the parties before the Tribunal, it is necessary for the Tribunal to get acquainted with all true and correct facts in respect of financial matters of the firm. The tribunal, which consists of two Chartered Accountants, in order to acquaint themselves with the true and correct facts and with a view to verify the statements placed on record by the appellants herein, have deemed it appropriate to take help of an expert i.e. an independent auditor. The directions, as issued by the Tribunal, therefore, can be construed to be a step-in-aid for determining the issues pending before the tribunal and the tribunal is within its bound in issuing such directions, which are contemplated by Section 26 of the Act. 9 Shri Soman, learned Counsel appearing for appellants, has invited my attention to a judgment in the matter of M.D. Army Welfare Housing Organisation Vs. Sumangal Services Pvt. Ltd., reported in AIR 2004 SC 1344. The question raised before the Apex Court related to an award passed under Arbitration Act, 1940. The ancillary question of issuance of directions by way of an interim measure had fallen for {17} aa0911.odt consideration before the Apex Court. The Apex Court, while dealing with the issue, has referred to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and more particularly Section 17 of the Act. In para 56 of the judgment, it is observed thus: 56 A bare perusal of the aforementioned provisions would clearly show that even under Section 17 of the 1996 Act the power of the Arbitrator is a limited one. It cannot issue any direction which would go beyond the reference or the arbitration agreement. Furthermore, an award of the Arbitrator under the 1996 Act is not required to be made a rule of Court, the same is enforceable on its own force. Even under Section 17 of 1996 Act, an interim order must relate to the protection of subject-matter of dispute and the order may be addressed only to a party to the arbitration. It cannot be addressed to other parties. Even under Section 17 of the 1996 Act, no power is conferred upon the Arbitral Tribunal to enforce its order nor does it provide for judicial enforcement thereof. The said interim order of the learned Arbitrator, therefore, being coram non judice was wholly without jurisdiction and thus a nullity. 10 Reliance placed by Counsel for appellants, on the reported judgment, is misplaced for the reason that in the instant matter, there is no direction issued to any party which can be construed as an interim {18} aa0911.odt measure within the meaning of Section 17. As recorded above, the Arbitral Tribunal has erred in recording “Section 17” of the Act in the order, however, if the text of the order and intention behind passing the order is considered, it would be more than clear that the directions issued are in the nature of directives, as contemplated by Section 26 of the Act. 11 It is very disturbing that although the parties were referred to the arbitral tribunal, by the order passed on 16th October, 2009, and since more than a year has lapsed since the arbitral tribunal has entered arbitration proceedings, there is no finality reached. The parties are expected to cooperate with the arbitral tribunal in disposal of the matter. 12 It is pointed out by learned Counsel appearing for Respondents No.1 & 7 that the appointed Chartered Accountant has reported the arbitral tribunal that the appellants are not cooperating in conducting audit of the firm and as such, he could not complete the task within time frame fixed by the tribunal. 13 I do not propose to make any comment in this regard, but it would be open for the arbitral tribunal to draw appropriate inference on consideration of all relevant circumstances. The appeal is devoid of substance. 14 The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. Pending Civil Application does not survive and stand disposed of accordingly. 15 Learned Counsel for appellants makes a request for {19} aa0911.odt granting protection and for suspending the order passed by the arbitral tribunal on 11.05.2011 for further four weeks. However, for the reasons recorded above, I am not inclined to consider the request favourably. The request made by learned Counsel for appellants stand rejected. R.M.BORDE adb/aa911 JUDGE