Ruling in Jet Airways (India) Limited v Sahara Airlines Limited, a division bench of Bombay High Court recently dismissed appeals by both the appellant and the respondent against an order passed by a single judge of the court, holding that the appeals were not maintainable.
The order of the single judge had sought to enforce a settlement reached in April 2007 during arbitral proceedings in a long-running dispute between the Sahara group and Jet Airways.
The court held that the proceedings initiated by both Jet and Sahara before the single judge were under section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and not under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. As such, appeals against the order of the judge were not maintainable as India’s arbitration laws provide for appeals only against some specified orders and do not provide for an appeal against every order passed in arbitral proceedings.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
In reaching this conclusion the court considered provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; Letters Patent of the High Court, Bombay; the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; the Arbitration Act 1940, and a recent judgment of the Supreme Court on a similar matter (Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd v Jindal Exports Ltd).
The court observed that the right of appeal is “not a mere matter of procedure, but is a substantive and vested right to be governed by a law”.
This ruling is the latest step in an ongoing dispute between Jet and Sahara triggered by Jet’s acquisition in 2006 of the entire 100% shareholding of Sahara for ₹20 billion. The payment for the acquisition is still being made and has been complicated by an unexpected demand for outstanding taxes.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The update of court judgments is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
