Learned Single Judge upheld the order of the Arbitral Tribunal.
However, after some time the appellant became suspicious and lodged a companyplaint against the respondent with the Economic Offences Wing on 21.3.2003.
Aggrieved against that order the appellant filed an arbitration petition before learned Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay.
Aggrieved against that order dated 26.7.2004 passed by learned Single Judge, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Division Bench and the Division Bench dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge.
At the foot of the said account of the respondent so maintained by the appellant a sum of Rs.49,79,388.17 paise remained due and payable by the respondent to the appellant as on 31.12.1999.
The appellant also sent companyfirmation letter to the respondent along with companyy of the statement of account and the respondent never raised any query number did the respondent raise any objection and on the companytrary, the respondent kept on promising to pay the outstanding dues in his accounts.
The respondent sought some time for making the payment because of financial difficulties.
A claim was made by M s.HCG Stock and Share Brokers Limited hereinafter to be referred to as the appellant before the Arbitral Tribunal and it was companytested by the present respondent on the ground of limitation.
The last date on which the appellant has carried out a transaction on behalf of the respondent was 1.7.1999.
5670 OF 2006 Arising out of S.L.P. c No.7040 of 2005 K.MATHUR,J. Leave granted.
Both these appeals involve similar question of law therefore, they are disposed of by this companymon order.
The appellant submitted that the cause of action has arisen when it filed the companyplaint against the respondent with the Economic Offences Wing on 21.3.2003 and therefore, the claim was within time and the same is number barred by limitation.
The respondent filed his reply and raised an objection that the claim is barred by time.
Learned Single Judge in turn has affirmed the order of the Arbitral Tribunal whereby the Arbitral Tribunal has upheld the objection of the respondent that the claim raised by the appellant is barred by limitation as per Bye laws of the National Stock Exchange of India Limited.
In the present dispute the time started running from the date on which the dispute has arisen.
For companyvenient disposal of both these appeals, the facts given in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. c No.6963 of 2005 are taken up for companysideration.
Apart from other objections which have been raised by the respondent, the respondent raised the plea of limitation and submitted that the time prescribed for filing any companyplaint arising out of a dispute redressal of which can be sought from the panel of Arbitrators by National Stock Exchange of India Limited is six months from the date of dispute.
The Arbitral Tribunal framed preliminary issue on limitation and held that the claim was barred by time and accordingly rejected the appellants claim.
ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. C NO.6963 OF 2005 W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NO.
This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No.738 of 2004 on 2.12.2004 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has affirmed the order of learned Single Judge.
