Supreme Court Quashes Commercial Court Order in Arbitration Dispute
Arbitration disputes often raise concerns regarding interim measures and the power of courts to interfere in commercial contracts. The case of Sanghi Industries Limited v. Ravin Cables Ltd. is a significant ruling where the Supreme Court of India examined the conditions under which a Commercial Court can direct a party to deposit the amount of a performance bank guarantee under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court ruled in favor of Sanghi Industries Limited, quashing the High Court and Commercial Court’s orders.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from three purchase orders placed by Sanghi Industries Limited with Ravin Cables Ltd. The appellant, Sanghi Industries, invoked arbitration after alleging that defective cables supplied by Ravin Cables had caused financial losses amounting to ₹29.31 crores. In response, Ravin Cables claimed an outstanding payment of ₹1.30 crores.
The matter escalated when Sanghi Industries invoked performance bank guarantees issued by Ravin Cables, leading the latter to approach the Commercial Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, seeking an order for the deposit of the guarantee amounts. The Commercial Court directed Sanghi Industries to deposit the amount, which was later upheld by the Gujarat High Court.
Arguments by the Petitioner (Sanghi Industries Limited)
The appellant, Sanghi Industries Limited, argued that:
- The bank guarantees had already been invoked, and the amounts had been paid by the bank before the Commercial Court passed its order.
- The Commercial Court’s order was contrary to the principles governing interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act.
- There were no allegations or evidence to suggest that Sanghi Industries was attempting to evade its liabilities or dispose of its properties to defeat an arbitral award.
- The order effectively modified the terms of the contract between the parties without jurisdiction.
Arguments by the Respondent (Ravin Cables Ltd.)
The respondent, Ravin Cables Ltd., contended that:
- The invocation of the performance bank guarantees was wrongful since the supplied cables were not defective.
- The deposit order by the Commercial Court was necessary to safeguard its interests during the arbitration proceedings.
- The appellant’s actions raised concerns that it might not honor an arbitral award, warranting judicial intervention.
Supreme Court’s Observations
A two-judge bench comprising Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari made the following observations:
1. Conditions Under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of CPC Were Not Met
The Court noted that under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), an order for securing disputed amounts can only be passed if the applicant demonstrates that the respondent is attempting to frustrate the execution of a potential arbitral award. The Court found no such evidence against Sanghi Industries.
Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-upholds-arbitration-award-in-seppco-vs-power-mech-dispute/
“Unless and until the pre-conditions under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the CPC are satisfied and unless there are specific allegations with cogent material, such an order under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act could not have been passed.”
2. Commercial Court’s Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court held that the Commercial Court’s directive to deposit the performance bank guarantee amount was unjustified since it was merely an interim measure and not a final determination of rights.
“The order passed by the Commercial Court under Section 9(ii)(e) of the Arbitration Act was intended to secure the amount in dispute, but there was no evidence that the appellant was likely to defeat the decree or award.”
3. Invocation of Performance Bank Guarantees
The Court emphasized that performance bank guarantees, once invoked and paid, are binding. It ruled that requiring the appellant to re-deposit the amount after invocation effectively negated the purpose of the guarantees.
Final Judgment
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the orders passed by the Gujarat High Court and the Commercial Court. However, to protect the interests of the parties, the Court directed Sanghi Industries Limited to furnish an undertaking backed by a company resolution, ensuring that any future arbitral award would be honored.
The key directions issued were:
- The Commercial Court’s order directing the deposit of bank guarantee amounts was set aside.
- The appellant must submit an undertaking that it will honor any arbitral award passed against it.
- The undertaking should be backed by a company resolution and submitted within four weeks.
Key Takeaways from the Judgment
1. Protection Against Unjustified Interim Measures
The ruling clarifies that courts must exercise caution while granting interim reliefs under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act. Orders directing security deposits should only be issued when the conditions under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of CPC are met.
2. Limited Scope of Judicial Intervention in Arbitration
The judgment reinforces the principle that arbitration agreements should be respected, and courts should not interfere with commercial contracts unless there is a genuine risk of injustice.
3. Performance Bank Guarantees are Binding
The Court reaffirmed that once a performance bank guarantee is invoked and paid, it becomes final. Any order requiring a re-deposit of such amounts would be an overreach of judicial authority.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in Sanghi Industries Limited v. Ravin Cables Ltd. upholds the autonomy of arbitration and restricts unwarranted judicial intervention. By setting aside the Commercial Court’s order, the ruling ensures that performance bank guarantees retain their sanctity while also protecting the interests of the parties involved. This judgment serves as an essential precedent in arbitration law and commercial disputes in India.
Petitioner Name: Sanghi Industries Limited.Respondent Name: Ravin Cables Ltd..Judgment By: Justice M.R. Shah, Justice Krishna Murari.Place Of Incident: Ahmedabad, Gujarat.Judgment Date: 30-09-2022.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: sanghi-industries-li-vs-ravin-cables-ltd.-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-30-09-2022.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Arbitration Act
See all petitions in Commercial Arbitration
See all petitions in Enforcement of Awards
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by Krishna Murari
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2022
See all petitions in 2022 judgments
See all posts in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all allowed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Arbitration and Alternate Dispute Resolution Category
