FAO--307/2017. Case: SATISH SHARMA Vs. INDIA INFOLINE LIMITED. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | FAO--307/2017 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | July 24, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ FAO No.307/2017
% 24th July, 2017 SATISH SHARMA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. P.S. Rana, Advocate. versus
INDIA INFOLINE LIMITED ..... Respondent
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
C.M. No.25831/2017 (exemption)
-
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of.
C.M. No.25830/2017 (for condonation of delay)
-
For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 25 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.
C.M. stands disposed of. FAO No.307/2017
-
This first appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) impugns
the judgment of the court below dated 7.3.2017 which has dismissed the objections filed by the appellant. The respondent/trading member filed arbitration claim in the arbitration proceedings against the appellant/constituent/client with respect to the debit balance of Rs.3,57,227/- as on 3.1.2009 in the account of the appellant/objector. This debit balance was on account of squaring off transactions on account of short-fall in the margin in the account of the appellant/client in the morning of 21.1.2008. The case of the appellant in the arbitration proceedings was that he had made a number of calls to the Relationship manager and the Branch manager of the respondent and he was not getting a clear status report and thus he was prevented from voluntarily squaring off his positions. In this regard, the Arbitrator has rejected the defence of the appellant/objector noting that the appellant/objector was an online member and he does not dispute that there did exist a shortfall in his margin. Arbitrator accordingly held that once there was a shortfall in the margin, hence the respondent/trading member was justified in squaring off the position by selling the holding of the appellant/objector, and which
resulted in the debit balance which was claimed in the arbitration proceedings.
-
Since the Award is a short Award, I reproduce the same as under:-
“1. The present application for Arbitration has been filed by India Infoline Ltd., a Trading Member, against the respondent-constituent, making a claim of Rs.5,24,233/-. The claim has been denied by the respondent. The matter was fixed for oral hearing on two different dates on which both parties were present/represented and made detailed submission. Supporting details were also filed by both sides...
To continue reading
Request your trial