CC/07/2023

ORDRE NO.02

DATED:01.02.2023

Today is fixed for admission hearing.

Complainant Nilkamal Das is physically present. He submits that:-

1. he is illiterate person.
2. he cannot pay any money because he is BPL holder.
3. he had used the card issued by OP for one time and purchased the article valued at Rs.1500.00 and subsequently paid Rs.2200.00 to the said company.
4. thereafter he did not use the said card.

But OP Company is now claiming more than Rs.60,000.00 from him. Hence he filed this case.

Perused Record.

Also perused petition of complaint along with annexure. On perusal of award dated 24.08.2022 issued by Susil Bharatiya we find that OP i.e. SBI card and payment services limited unit 401 and 402, 4^th floor, Agarwal Millennium Tower E 1.2.3 New Delhi 110034 being the claimant had filed one arbitration petition before the arbitrator namely Mr. Susil Bharatiya, sole arbitrator 60, Bhagirathi Apartments Secotors-09, Rohini New Delhi 110085 against the present petitioner vide arbitration case No.AA/2022/SBIC/ARB/42432.

Mr. Susil Bharatiya issued the said award on 24.02.2022 at New Delhi and directed the present petitioner to pay the sum of Rs.61,085.30 along with interest @ 18% per annum from 10.05.2022 i.e date of filing of claim till is realisation in full and he was also directed to pay cost of Rs.5,000.00 towards expenses of the present arbitration proceedings.

In this context we have carefully gone through Section 34 of the arbitration and conciliation act 1996 which read as under:-

                   34. Application for setting aside arbitral award.-(1) Recourse to a Court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such award in accordance with sub-section (2) and sub-section (3). 

                                                                                                Contd....P1/2

(2) An arbitral award may be set aside by the Court only if-

(a) the party making the application [establishes on the basis of the record of the arbitral tribunal that]-

                   (i) a party was under some incapacity, or

                   (ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law for the time being in force; or

                   (iii) the party making the application was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case; or

                   (iv) the arbitral award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not failing within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration:

                   Provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated from those not so submitted, only that part of the arbitral award which contains decisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside; or

From the contents of the complaint filed by complainant Nilkamal Das before this Commission on 19.01.2023 it appears before us that he is not satisfied with the award issued by arbitrator Mr. Susil Bharatiya.

As per section 34 of arbitration and conciliation act 1996, remedy lies before the Ld. District judge having jurisdiction over the issue.

As remedy lies specifically before the Ld. District Judge as per section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, so it is clear before this Commission that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the aforesaid complaint. Hence

It is

                                                Ordered

                                                                   that the present complaint be and the same is dismissed  being not admitted.

Case is this disposed off accordingly.

MEMBER                                                                     PRESIDENT