1 AP404/09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.404 OF 2009 Mr Dinesh B. Pokhriyal ...Petitioner v/s M/s Unique Securities ...Respondents Mr R.S. Apte, Senior Counsel i/b Mr M.S. Lagu for Petitioner. Mr S.S. Purohit with Mr A.A. Mukkri i/b M/s Purohit and Co. for Respondents. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH J. DATE : 1ST APRIL 2011. 2 AP404/09 P.C. :- 1] The petitioner by this petition challenges the award made by the Arbitral Tribunal of the National Stock Exchange. The respondent is a trading member of the Stock Exchange whereas the petitioner was their constituent. There was debit in the account of the petitioner. Therefore, he issued two cheques, the cheques were dishonoured, with the result the account continued to be in debit. Therefore, the stock in possession of the broker was sold. Even after sale of the stock, the account still remained in debit. Therefore, the arbitration was filed. The Arbitral Tribunal has considered all relevant aspects and has made an award for payment of Rs.50,20,000/- with interest. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner first submitted that the notice required to be issued under section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 was not issued for commencement of the arbitration, therefore the award is invalid. The submission is without any substance. The arbitration 3 AP404/09 in the present case is a statutory arbitration governed by the bye-laws of the National Stock Exchange which do not require any notice as required by section 21 of the said Act. In any case, this contention was not raised before the Arbitral Tribunal. The second contention raised is that in the statement of claim, the broker has stated that the petitioner squared up the entire account whereas the finding is squaring up the account was done by the broker. It is correct that the squaring up is always by the broker. In the statement of claim obviously the statement has been made by mistake. The petitioner was fully aware of the position that the stock was sold by the broker to square up the account. The third submission was that in the statement of claim it is stated that the petitioner has no dispute whatsoever in respect of said amount of Rs.50,20,000/- and therefore the award against the petitioner could not have been made. What it means is that the petitioner cannot dispute his liability to pay that amount because he himself had issued cheques to clear that amount. Taking overall 4 AP404/09 view of the matter therefore, it is clear that the award is in consonance with the record, no interference is called for. Petition is rejected. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Private Secretary of this Court. Certified copy expedited. ( JUSTICE D.K. DESHMUKH )