Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Madan B. Lokur, R.K. Agrawal and D.Y. Chandrachud JUDGMENT
Madan B. Lokur, J.
1. These appeals have been referred to a Bench of three judges in view of a difference of opinion between two learned judges of this Court. The controversy is best understood by referring to the proceedings recorded on 9th May, 2006:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha pronounced His Lordship's judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee.
Leave granted.
For the reasons mentioned in the signed judgment, Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 18611/2004 filed by M/s. Centrotrade Minerals and Metal Inc., is dismissed and Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 21340 of 2005 (actually 2004) preferred by Hindustan Copper Ltd. is allowed. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the parties shall pay and bear their own costs.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee pronounced His Lordship's judgment disposing of the appeals in terms of the signed judgment.
In view of difference of opinion, the matter is referred to a larger Bench for consideration. The Registry of this Court shall place the matter before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constitution of a larger Bench.
The decisions rendered by Justice Sinha and Justice Chatterjee are reported as Centrotrade Minerals & Metals Inc. v. Hindustan Copper Ltd. MANU/SC/8146/2006 : (2006) 11 SCC 245.
2. Since the facts of the case have been detailed by both the learned judges in their separate judgments, it is not necessary for us to detail them for the third time. What is necessary to state, however, is that the parties had entered into a contract and some disputes and differences arose between them. The contract contained an arbitration Clause and Centrotrade invoked it. Pursuant thereto the Indian Council of Arbitration appointed an arbitrator. The arbitrator gave a NIL award and then Centrotrade invoked the second part of the arbitration Clause and the arbitrator in London gave an award on 29th September, 2001 in accordance with the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce. The award rendered by the arbitrator in London was sought to be enforced by Centrotrade by moving an application Under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
3. The arbitration Clause in the contract between the parties is Clause 14 and this reads as follows:
14. Arbitration-All disputes or differences whatsoever arising between the parties out of, or relating to, the construction, meaning and operation or effect of the contract or the breach thereof shall be settled by arbitration in India through the arbitration panel of the Indian Council of Arbitration in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the Indian Council of Arbitration.
If either party is in disagreement with the arbitration result in India, either party will have the right to appeal to a second arbitration in London, UK in accordance with the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Co........